Not exactly. But I know what you mean. One of the limitations of the a lot of the chess literature out there is that for any position the author only analyses the best couple of moves leaving the beginning to wonder about other moves that look interesting; why are they bad?
I once had a great chess book where there would be a position on each page and you had to decide on a move, and then you turn the page and it might say, if Nc2 (10 pts), O-O (8 pts), Qc2 (7 pts), NxN (5 pts), any other move (0 points) which was half way there.
Because of this I wrote an app
https://itunes.apple.com/US/app/id1096289047?mt=8
where you play through a grandmaster game and try to predict the move. For every possible move you could make, you then get a score and some words about why that move is good or bad. It's free so if you have an iOS device feel free to try it.
Here's the premise: I am a beginner and have been playing mainly opponents in the 1000-1200 USCF range. All of us know a few moves (say 6-8) in a basic 1. e4 e5 line. But after that, the moves quickly go out of any "book" lines. It's not that folks are throwing away material, but the moves are certainly not the best.
Is anyone aware of a book(s) that tries to do the following say for a given move: White made move "x." That move was not the best in that position and here's what she should have done. But given White moved "x," Black should have responded "y" and here's why. But, alas, Black responded "z." Given Black's not-so-great "z," White should now respond with "a" and here's why.