2016 Broadcaster Rankings (TV): #10 – #1
Introduction and #31-32
#30 – #21
#20 – #11
Roughly four years ago now, the present author facilitated a crowdsourcing project designed to place a “grade” on each of the league’s television and radio broadcast teams. The results weren’t intended to represent the objective quality or skill of the relevant announcers, but rather to provide a clue as to which broadcast teams are likely to appeal most (or least) to the readers of this site.
The results of that original exercise have been useful as a complement to the dumb NERD scores published by the author in these pages. Four years later, however, they’ve become much less useful. In the meantime, a number of the broadcast teams cited in that original effort have changed personnel. It’s possible that the tastes of this site’s readers have changed, also.
About a month ago, the present author began the process of reproducing that original crowdsourcing effort, facilitating a ballots for this site’s readers. This post represents the final installment of the corresponding results for the television side of things.
Below are the 10th- through 1st-ranked television broadcast teams, per the FanGraphs readership.
But first, three notes:
- Teams are ranked in ascending order of Overall rating. Overall ratings are not merely averages of Charisma and Analysis.
- The author has attempted to choose reader comments that are either (a) illustrative of the team’s place in the rankings or (b) conspicuously amusing.
- A complete table of ratings cast will appear in these pages Friday.
10. San Diego Padres
Main Broadcasters: Dick Enberg/Don Orsillo and Mark Grant
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 3.8, 3.1, 3.5
Three Reader Comments
• “Enberg is the best broadcaster no one talks about.”
• “Mark Grant… is funny and brings the knowledge and humor of a journeyman player.”
• “I want everyone to understand just how good Don Orsillo is at calling a game. Very. Very good, is the amount of good he is.”
Notes
A number of respondents cite similarities between Enberg in San Diego and Vin Scully up the coast in Los Angeles — not necessarily for the length of their tenure or prominence in the game (by which criteria Scully is unparalleled) but for their affability and comfort with the leisurely pace at which a baseball game is played. Grant, for his part, has the bearing of a “typical ex-player,” but does seem to offer a measure of playfulness and good humor to which readers respond well. As for Orsillo, he was largely adored by Boston fans.
9. Los Angeles Angels
Main Broadcasters: Victor Rojas and Mark Gubicza
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 3.7, 3.2, 3.6
Three Reader Comments
• “Year to year, the two consistently improve chemistry.”
• “Gubicza is a good fit for Orange County.”
• “These TV broadcasts have the feel of a teacher’s lounge.”
Notes
It’s difficult to conceive of a scenario in which the phrase “a good fit for Orange County” is employed as a compliment — and yet, that appears to be the intention here. Otherwise, a number of respondents praise Rojas, in particular — both for his skills as a play-by-play commentator and also willingness to critique the Angels themselves.
8. Oakland Athletics
Main Broadcasters: Glen Kuiper and Ray Fosse
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 3.5, 3.4, 3.6
Three Reader Comments
• “Easy to settle into a game with these guys, though they don’t particularly stand out in one particular facet.”
• “I wish Rickey Henderson would get in that booth.”
• “Greencollar AF.”
Notes
One of the virtues to which respondents point on multiple occasions is the restraint exhibited by Kuiper and Fosse. Which, as other comments and ratings here suggest, that’s a valuable skill for a broadcaster. In marriage, it’s a challenge to remain even tolerable to one’s spouse. The broadcaster faces a similar obstacle when dealing with the same viewing public day after day.
7. Tampa Bay Rays
Main Broadcasters: Dewayne Staats and Brian Anderson
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 3.6, 3.6, 3.8
Three Reader Comments
• “Dewayne and BA appreciate the game and complement the action on the field instead of bombarding us with their every thought.”
• “[I] watch Tampa games for about six weeks every year. The announcers wear well, know the game well, and know the team well.”
• “A very well-produced broadcast with tons of replays and timely analysis.”
Notes
When this exercise was conducted four years ago, the mixed reviews for the Rays’ booth didn’t seem to support the relatively strong score. Strangely, that remains the case this time, as well. How does one explain this course of events? Perhaps this way: in the Tampa area, it is only those who are dissatisfied who endeavor to spread their opinions around.
6. Milwaukee Brewers
Main Broadcasters: Brian Anderson and Bill Schroeder
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 3.9, 3.3, 3.9
Three Reader Comments
• “Brian Anderson is an excellent play-by-play man who has clearly developed his skill to the point he understands big moments and the right level of enthusiasm for what the game merits. This is a very underrated crew thanks to Anderson’s lead.”
• “Bill Schroeder is definitely an old-school baseball guy… but he always seems to have great chemistry no matter who they pair him with.”
• “Sophia Minnaert is good at eliciting stories from players, particularly from the Latin American-born players on the team who often don’t get to speak as naturally as they otherwise could.”
Notes
Readers will likely recognize Anderson from his work with TBS during the postseason — and, over the past couple years, as one of the voices for the NBA playoffs, as well. Respondents are nearly unanimous in their praise both for his narrative skills and temperament. Color analyst Bill Schroeder is a former member of the Brewers. For whatever he lacks in white-hot analysis, he seems to compensate for it by means of an easy affability. Sophia Minnaert, also cited a couple times by respondents, speaks Spanish!
5. Baltimore Orioles
Main Broadcasters: Gary Thorne and Mike Bordick/Jim Palmer
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 3.9, 3.5, 3.9
Three Reader Comments
• “Orioles commentators are set apart from the rest due in large part to a lack of partisanship…. [C]riticism, praise, and optimism are shared evenly and never unrealistically.”
• “[Thorne’s]… taped pieces with Showalter stand out because Showalter is visibly engaged by the questions Thorne asks, and gives thoughtful replies.”
• “Palmer is great with on-field analysis and his favorite subject, Jim Palmer.”
Notes
Probably no other set of reader comments features the sort of uniformity as those regarding the Orioles’ television crew, whose virtues and vices appear to be bywords. Thorne receives considerable praise for his voice and playfulness; less praise for his facility with Spanish surnames. Respondents profit from Jim Palmer’s insights into pitching, even if they’re sometimes accompanied by insights into Jim Palmer. As for Bordick, the sense is that he might revert too often to unsubstantiated wisdom — at least for the tastes of this site’s readers, that is.
4. Chicago Cubs
Main Broadcasters: Len Kasper and Jim Deshaies
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 4.1, 4.4, 4.4
Three Reader Comments
• “Both [Kasper] and JD are quite analytically curious, and they find unique ways to incorporate it into the broadcast without alienating the more tradtional and/or casual fans.”
• “It often just sounds like two laid-back pals having fun at the ballpark. They don’t know everything, nor do they claim to know everything. If they want to learn something, they will immediately look to Twitter for fan response during the broadcast.”
• “JD keeps giving material to @DeshaiesQuotes on Twitter. And God said it was good.”
Notes
Yesterday, the author noted the decline of interest among FanGraphs readers in the Houston television broadcast, now ranked 16th after having occupied fourth place when this same exercise was conducted four years ago. The difference for the Astros in the meantime? The departure of Jim Deshaies. Deshaies is now employed by the Cubs, joining Len Kasper, himself having already exhibited a real comfort with advanced metrics before Deshaies’ arrival. As a pair, they’re particularly well-equipped to comment on a club that has become excellent largely on the strength of progressive ideas.
3. New York Mets
Main Broadcasters: Gary Cohen, Ron Darling, and Keith Hernandez
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 4.7, 4.5, 4.7
Three Reader Comments
• “A subtle but important part of the broadcast is that the three know their limits…. What’s more, [they] seem to genuinely like each other. Letting the others speak isn’t a chore and comes out of a genuine curiousity of what the others have to say.”
• “Their analysis doesn’t get too deep into sabermetrics, but they do provide rational scouting and mechanical explanations for things that happen in the game.”
• “They don’t spout old-school nonsense about complete games, clogging bases, or unwritten rules of conduct, nor do they glorify the ‘back-in-my-day’ approaches to the game.”
Notes
The ratings for the final three broadcast teams were mostly interchangeable when this same exercise was conducted four years ago. They remain that same way now. A number of respondents suggest that one of the defining characteritics of the Mets triuvirate has been their capacity to render the club’s games tolerable even during lean years. Which, that seems like a fair litmus test. Certain telecasts are almost certainly improved by a strong on-field team. It speaks to the skills of the broadcasters, however, when they’re able to remain palatable even under miserable conditions.
2. San Francisco Giants
Main Broadcasters: Duane Kuiper and Mike Krukow
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 4.8, 4.6, 4.8
Three Reader Comments
• “Absolute best, bar none. I will fight you about it.”
• “Kruk, Kuip, (Dave Flemming), and (Jon Miller) are as woven into the Bay Area experience as seagulls, redwoods, and gentrification.”
• “When this foursome ends a part of me will die. The life part.”
Notes
A curiously high percentage of respondents refer to Kuiper and Krukow as the “best in the business” — using that precise phrase. Is this a central part of every San Franciscan’s lexicon? Is it some manner of password to a local speakeasy? In any case, apart from that liguistic oddity, it’s obvious that Giants fans possess real affection not only for Kuiper and Krukow, but also radio broadcasters Jon Miller and Dave Flemming, who make occasional appearances on the television side, as well.
1. Los Angeles Dodgers (Home)
Main Broadcasters: Vin Scully
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 4.8, 4.2, 4.8
Three Reader Comments
• “What Vin lacks in comfort and familiarity with analytics, he makes up for in literally everything else. Anything less than a 5 would be a damn travesty.”
• “I recently found myself totally riveted by a story [he told] regarding Madison Bumgarner saving some partially-digested rabbits found inside of a snake on MadBum’s ranch.”
• “”I’m only half-way serious when I say this, but is there anyway we could all throw in a buck and get his mind/head transplanted to a younger body?”
Notes
Scully receives the highest overall score among broadcasters: a mark of 4.7975, compared to the 4.7874 figure earned by the Giants’ booth. The support for Scully among respondents isn’t unanimous, but it’s pretty close. There are some who don’t care for the relatively slow pace at which he speaks; others suggest that maybe age has dulled his sharpest edges. Regardless, the majority of reader comments reveal the sort of profound emotion one typically reserves for family. And not even everyone in the family, just the best members of it.
Carson Cistulli has published a book of aphorisms called Spirited Ejaculations of a New Enthusiast.
This high of a placement for the Orioles TV crew makes me sad for the state of baseball broadcasting. But they should get credit for keeping us up to date on everyone’s batting average with runners in scoring position every…single…time a runner is on second or third.
I only get to listen to Vin Scully occasionally on MLB.TV. He’s made at least one reference to “Fangraphs” in the past year or two.
I’m a diehard Giants fan and Still love to listen to Vin call a game, there’s just joy in his love of baseball after 67 years. Kruk and Kuip are the best behind Vin for sure, I think the Mets guys and the Cubs guys are excellent too. Don’t you just love MLB baseball because we get to watch so many games?
Wait a minute: how does Dodgers/Vin Scully (4.8, 4.2, 4.8) take the #1 spot over Giants/Kuiper and Krukow (4.8, 4.6, 4.8), when the Giants team has superior numbers over Scully? How does that work, exactly?
From the article: “Scully receives the highest overall score among broadcasters: a mark of 4.7975, compared to the 4.7874 figure earned by the Giants’ booth.”
Scully won by 0.01
Yeah, the math doesn’t work.
As K-Man mentioned below, the overall score is independent of the other two scores. Look at Oakland and Tampa Bay for example – the overall score is higher than either of the other two.
the overall score is not derived by aggregating the two other marks, but is scored independently of them. Says it right there in the introduction as well.
1. “A very well-produced broadcast with tons of replays and timely analysis.” I feel like I read this exact statement in the #11-20 post, too?
2. WHOA new comments system – Disqus?
Not Disqus… We tried that once; don’t think we’ll do that again.
Is this an experiment or permanent change? I prefer the old system that aggregated net votes up/down and only identified those with 5 or more net votes either way. I think people could see “+8? My comment was generally well received” whereas now they may see +20/-12 and fixate on the (relatively) high number of down votes, even though the net result is the same. Then again some may see value in seeing the raw vote totals, so I can see both points of view.
It’s not a huge point of concern and I appreciate your willingness to experiment and receive/respond to feedback (see: the auto-play video ads that were bogging things down for so many of us).
And look! We can edit replies?! I will take whatever voting system you want if it comes with the edit functionality. Good show, old top.
I agree with Jason B on both parts. This system is more distracting. When there are 100 comments, I’ll usually just scroll down to the ones that have pluses on them. Now, you can’t really do that. On the other hand, editing is definitely more important.
I’d think FG readers would appreciate having ALL the data. This new comment system provides that.
I have to agree. I think this kind of microgranular instantly visible up/downvoting has bad consequences for discussion, leading people to treat it even more like a point-scoring game. Hiding until the 5-vote threshhold was reached was a very good idea.
I don’t disagree but it might also help with the perceived groupthink. Say a post has many up and down votes but nets +10 then people won’t be afraid to express an opposing view because they know they have people on their side even if it’s not the majority.
Have never been crazy about Scully’s prosody TBH. I know to criticize him is practically sacrilege. I think he would really have benefitted from having a partner the last few years.
Perhaps with bias, I don’t know how the Giants crew can be any more highly regarded than the Mets trio. Cohen is the PbP gold standard and Ron and Keith bring the joviality to the broadcasts. Moreover, I will add that Howie Rose is also the radio version of the gold standard for PbP. As mentioned, Met fans have been pretty darn fortunate to have these guys thru a lot of lean years.
I agree 100000%. Scully has an easy way about him, great story teller with great stories TO tell, and he’s clearly a part of baseball history, but watching any one game, there is simply none that matches the Mets’ booth. Cohen is the best play by play man that I have ever heard in any sport, and Keith and Ron bring a thinking players’ perspective, not some “aw shucks dude” kind of nonsense. Watching a Mets game with these three makes one feel not only like they can get a full appreciation of THAT game, but a fuller appreciation of THE game of baseball. They talk to the audience like intelligent people.
Scully broadcast games in a way no one else does anymore or really even can. He is the finest at his profession the game has ever seen or probably ever will.
I agree with both of you. When I’m watching Scully, I don’t want analysis of how the game works, or stats, or breakdowns, or “here’s why he threw that pitch.” I watch the Mets broadcast for that. When I’m watching Scully, I want “here’s a story about this player’s hometown in Venezuela,” and “this reminds me of a play I saw in 1961,” and “boy, remember when this team had [player I’ve never heard of] in 1974? [Gives full scouting report]”
Exactly. Analysis can be exhausting.
Some people don’t like that and are happy no one broadcasts like that anymore. I am one of them. I can respect him for his long career, but i just don’t like listening to him
The problem is that there are just people who are used to flashier broadcasting now with far less substance who don’t or can’t appreciate the amazing qualities that Vin brings to a game. The other night he was talking about how the dirt at the polo grounds was “fake dirt”, and people used to bring their own dirt to get a better grip on the ball or what have you. The way I just explained that sounds boring as hell, but the way Vin explained it for a few minutes was beautiful.
The thing that has gone on Vin over the last few years is his ability to remember the correct players name some times, but he’s so great at everything else it doesn’t matter as much. Substance over flash.
I love Scully, but I don’t exactly want to hear stories about how the dirt at Polo Grounds was fake during a game. That’s something I’d rather hear in a podcast.
His style is certainly different, and I can understand why people may not care for it.
If I may ask, why would you not want to hear that type of info during a game? I mean, if you just don’t think it’s interesting, then sure, I get why you wouldn’t wanna hear it. But why make the distinction between a podcast and a live game broadcast?
I guess if you want a numbers-heavy announcer then maybe Vin’s story telling would simply not work for you. (And I’m not knocking numbers guys. I mean, hey, I’m on Fangraphs too.)
I guess I just think that as much as I love the analytic side of baseball, it’s still a game involving real people with all kinds of outlooks, and Vin does a great job at bringing to life its human side.
I don’t find the history of dirt interesting. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy Vin Scully’s stories, but just not all of them. A story about the dirt at Polo Grounds isn’t all that interesting to me.
I said a podcast because I’d actually enjoy a podcast about baseball history/super cool, quirky stories that Vin tends to tell.
I’m not a guy who has to have lots of analysis, but it’s always appreciated when it’s done well.
regarding Scully, while I can see your point about having benefited with a partner the past few years, i don’t know if Scully would be Scully with a partner.
I’ve been a dodger fan for 30+ years, and some of my fondest memories of Vin were of him and Joe Garagiola doing the game of the week together in the 80s. He’s great with or without a partner (just glad he never got forced to pair up with a yahoo like Steve Lyons)
As a Dodger fan, I’ll concede that Scully has slipped a little in the past few years as his age has started to catch up with him. However, putting him with a partner would go against his entire style. He’s long said that he doesn’t like the 2 or 3 man booths, who often get caught up in talking with each other and make the listener feel like the odd-man-out. Instead, he likes to speak directly to the audience; with each person it feels like it’s just him and you.
Scully’s more than just facts or numbers or keeping you informed. It’s like you’re sitting down to listen to someone you really admire, like a grandfather, while he tells you his stories. Maybe his style doesn’t work for everyone, which is fine, but I for one would take him over anybody else and it’s not even particularly close.
There was a game earlier this year where he clearly ran out of things to talk about.
Around the 7th inning, he began to “discuss” Chase Utley’s influence on the Dodgers. All he did was start listing players that appeared on the video feed and say, “Utley has been an influence to him”… for about 6-7 players.
I understand it was one game, but yikes. Not one of his finer moments.
Considering he’s 88 year old and retiring this year, it’s not surprising that he’s starting to show some cracks. But that still doesn’t change the way we Dodger fans feel about him. Scully could literally spend the whole broadcast reading the ingredients on a Quaker Oats box and I’d still take him over anyone else.
Josh Lewin as Howie’s sidekick is pretty nifty, too. We’ve been too spoiled with our broadcasting teams.
Cohen is very, very good. I think calling him the “gold standard” is a little too far, however. But that probably just comes down to specific tastes.
I’ll always have a soft spot for Keith because I met him on an elevator in Shea and he made a dick joke under his breath to me.
re: the Mets – “They don’t spout old-school nonsense about complete games, clogging bases, or unwritten rules of conduct, nor do they glorify the ‘back-in-my-day’ approaches to the game.”
I’m a Mets fan and have listened to GKR for 10 years now. As much as I love them, this comment really isn’t true at all. Keith and Ron very frequently spout old-school nonsense and the “back in my day” approaches to the game.
I disagree; Darling and Hernandez refer their careers on occasion, but they never, ever spout old school nonsense. Ever. Ever.
Last night or the night before Keith point blank said that he doesn’t care about exit velocity or any of this Sabermetric nonsense. I love the broadcast but they are very old school and anti-metric.
If we’re remembering the same thing, I think it was in the context of Kevin Plawecki. Ron Darling said that the advanced metrics and Statcast data today could be good for young players going through a slump, because they could learn if they were doing things the right way and could expect better results if they kept at it, whereas in the past they might be more inclined to panic and try to change if they weren’t getting results.
Keith then said that even though the metrics were saying one thing, at the end of the day he agreed with the manager (Terry Collins) that whatever the metrics say, at some point Plawecki actually has to start hitting, and if he doesn’t then he (Keith) doesn’t care what the metrics say.
I think Keith is definitely the one of the trio you could most easily describe as old school, but he’s charming and entertaining about it in that Keith Hernandez style most Mets fans enjoy. Darling and Cohen seem a bit more open. They seem to like to explain the game more in terms of the on-the-spot mechanics and decisions on the field rather than advanced stats or high level trends. But I think the only way I would call them definitively old school is in how they don’t like the current replay rules because they feel it takes away from the in-the-moment excitement of a big play. Otherwise they seem to accept and acknowledge that the game has changed in a lot of ways in the last 30 years, and I wouldn’t call rational discussion of that fact a bad thing.
How about all the groans about the shift from Keith? I honestly love these guys but it’s a little frustrating… And condescending.
I mean, does anybody actually enjoy how overused the shift has become? I understand it’s being used because it works, but that doesn’t make it enjoyable.
Well, to the people who’ve argued that shifts and power pitching are ruining the game, offense has been up all around so far. So good thing there has been no rush to put in any new shift rulings.
yeah, no doubt. But when they do it, it doesn’t come off as too condescending for some reason. And they can do a little better embracing some modern metrics. That would be my biggest gripe about them. But overall, the crew really works well together even if it’s largely due to Cohen.
I am not a fan of Ron Darling’s analysis in particular.
As an Orioles fan, I love Gary Thorne… he brings the right emotional tone and seems to have fun. Bordick, on the other hand… bland, robotic, … I don’t know. I often switch to the radio feed when he’s on. Palmer, as the comments point out, often relates everything to his own experiences, but at least it provides insight… and he has some entertaining stories.
FWIW, I miss Buck Martinez.
Agreed, Thorne is great, can’t stand Bordick, and Palmer, he’s just Palmer and I enjoy his stories and kind of just see him as a rambling grandfather who I respect. But I almost always listen to the radio team. Joe Angel is awesome, especially when he’s with Fred Manfra. I can’t stand Jim Hunter though, he just seems so fake, and it seems Joe Angel doesn’t even pay attention to what Hunter is saying half the time, which is fine by me.
I like the Throne/Palmer combo but far prefer listening to the radio broadcast. Joe Angel and Fred Manfra are outstanding. On a side note, Brian Roberts was on the MASN broadcast recently, and maybe because it was just something different I enjoyed it. I WAS nervous a sneeze or something was going to force him to leave the broadcast, but thankfully disaster was averted.
agreed. love Thorne, and like Palmer. Bordick….blah.
^ Apparently Gary Thorne and Buck Martinez won an Emmy in 2009 for their broadcast coverage of the Orioles.
The article states about Thorne “Thorne receives considerable praise for his voice and playfulness; less praise for his facility with Spanish surnames”. What do you want from him? He has a HOCKEY background. He’d probably be more at home pronouncing those 20-character Finnish and Russian names than the Hispanic ones.
“Absolute best, bar none. I will fight you about it.”
GKR is the best, bar none. I will fight YOU about it!
Kuiper and Krukow are very, very good. Cohen, Darling and Hernandez are a lot better.
Krukow was also very good in RBI baseball. So there’s that.
(Then again Hernandez and Darling were too.)
I’m happy to see Thorne and Palmer so high up, I think they’re deserving. When they’re in the booth together, the broadcast clears the most important hurdle of all: it’s not boring. Bordick is not great, and neither is Jim Hunter, but you can only ask for so much. I watch a lot of AL games and I’m never jealous of another team’s crew.
Cubs fan. Don’t fully understand the love for Len and JD. But I also love Hawk, so my opinion is invalid.
http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/76108760/v277856783/remembering-buehrles-perfect-game-from-2009
“Call your sons. Call your daughters. Call your friends. Call your neighbors. Mark Buehrle has a perfect game going to the ninth!”
“That ball hit deep into left center field. Wise back, back… MAKES THE CATCH! DEWAYNE WISE MAKES THE CATCH! WHAT A PLAY BY WISE! MERCY!” “One of the greatest catches I have ever seen in 50 years in the game!”
“ALEXEIII! YESSS!!! YESSSSSS!!! YESSSSSSSS!!!!!! YESSSS!!! YESSS!!!!!” “A perfect game by Mark Buehrle!”
If I were watching a game with Harrelson sitting next to me, I would change seats.
That the Cubs announcers made the top 5 on this list is hysterical.
The city of Chicago deserves better announcers than what they have with the Cubs & White Sox.
Or maybe not.
Cubs announcers are awesome! I’ve heard Mets and Vin once each and I’d agree they’re better (haven’t heard Giants) but I still love Len and JD! What don’t you like about them?
Very homerish. Not great with analysis, or at least not during the games I’ve caught of theirs.
They have good chemistry, but I just don’t particularly enjoy them.
As someone who watches literally any baseball game he can, I wish the YES network (Yankees) would smarten up and get rid of Kay and just leave Paul O’Neill, David Cone, and Kenny Singleton up there. Though for what it’s worth, I absolutely LOVE when Al Leiter is up there as a guest, They’ll also being in Lou Pinella from time to time when they are in Tampa since he lives down there. But Micheal Kay wears on you quick.
Well, at least it’s not the radio crew. Now talk about a train wreck…
Yeah, I remember being on PS4 with my Army buddies and I had the Yankees game on the MLB At Bat thing and they were getting mad at Susan for literally saying nothing except what Sterling already said. and when she did have a bright moment it was the one thing no one gave a crap about.
“It’s difficult to conceive of a scenario in which the phrase “a good fit for Orange County” is employed as a compliment — and yet, that appears to be the intention here.”
It’s amazing but true: Many who live in Orange County are happy about their circumstances!
OC has amazing weather, the beach, great looking women, not quite the traffic as LA does (but getting worse), so what’s not to like? OK, $500K for a rundown shack in most parts of the county isn’t so likeable.
“…so what’s not to like?”
It was a key source of modern reactionary politics.
First things first, baseball is my most favorite thing in the world and without Vin, I might not be too familiar with it. I’m probably biased.
But hear me out. Listen to Vin. Listen to Gibson’s homer off Eck in ’88. “And she is gooone….” and then silence as he knows just when to let the crowd tell the rest of the story. Listen to the exuberance in his voice when an exciting young player from another team makes it to town and Vin gets to watch them play. Utterly unbiased. This isn’t Rex Hundley pleading for the Angels’ entire 25 man roster to populate the AL all star team or whatever. This is just a fan of the game eloquently painting a picture with a special sense of colors and textures, as all good artists do.
Sure, he’s a little seasoned and can mispronounce a word here or there, and his pace is slower than most. But if you’re hung up on that, you’re paying attention to the wrong things.
Not saying he’s bad or anything remotely like that. It’s more that he’s an acquired taste.
Now go listen to Gary Cohen or Howie Rose do Met games.
An acquired taste? You’re certainly entitled to your own opinions…but this one’s wrong.
How is it wrong? There are a lot of people who wouldn’t like to listen to a game called by Scilly. I understand why people love him and what he brings to a broadcast, but it’s really just not my cup of tea.
No, I know. I was trying to be silly, but it’s hard to convey tone.
Hah, ok will upthumb you then. Def missed the levity of the previous one! : > )
As a Tampa Bay Baseball Club fan, I am surprised that reviews would be mixed. I absolutely love those guys because they are knowledgable, let the game breathe a little bit, and genuinely seem to attempt to evaluate the home and away teams objectively.
I am not even a Rays fan, and I have always liked Staats, going WAY back to when he was the play-by-play guy for the Astros in the early 80s.
I’m a Cubs fan so take this in that spirit. Len Kasper is my favorite PbP guy in baseball. He blends sabermetrics into the broadcast in a very digestable way for people who may not be familiar with them. He knows when to get excited and when to tone it down. It’s a wonderful experience listening to him daily.
When Bob Brenly left the Cubs I was afraid that they were going to replace him with someone who would bring the quality of the broadcast down, but JD is more than I could have ever asked for. I feel a little bad for Astros fans that they lost him.
Can we just agree that trying to talk about sports while sports are currently happening is mostly a uniformly terrible venture?
It really is. Especially the color analysts, who are almost uniformly obnoxious. For me there are only a few good broadcasts – Scully, SF, and CHC. NYM, BOS, TOR, and SEA are decent, TEX and SD are okay.
NYM’s definitely better than CHC, in my opinion and by the consensus.
I’m not a fan of Hernandez so they’re a notch below for me.
This new comment system is really bringing out the downvote proles.
Hey, you mixed up the color guys for 6 and 7. It’s actually Brian Anderson who does color for the Rays, and Brian Anderson who does color for the Brewers, not Brian Anderson who does color for the Brewers, and Brian Anderson, who does color for the Rays.
Yeah, people just don’t give Tampa the respect that they deserve.
What I took away from all this is that there are just too many Brian Andersons in baseball. Which of these guys used to pitch for the Dbacks when they won the WS in ’01 ?
I’m not even a Dodgers fan but I still watch almost every one of their home games for Scully. He’s a national treasure.
I think the argument between, the Dodgers, Mets, and Giants broadcast is legit.
If you grew up in L.A, and watched Vin, it is too deep for most folks form the area to be objective about, but what I will say is that what sets him apart is not dissimilar from what sets apart the Mets team, which is that both are more or less cultured. The Mets team is very New York, and in the best possible way. Scully is peerless, and his stories contain both tremendous knowledge and experience without a hint of arrogance. There remains a genuine curiosity in his tone which is so deeply engaging that at times one wants the action to stop so that he can go deeper into his yarn. The Giants team is very good as well, because Jon Miller calls a pleasant and crisp clean game, and Krukow and Kuiper have a style that’s very warm and familiar, and and they weave in good insights and are very intentional about keeping the game in focus.
The O’s are the next tier down, and after that it all feels pretty interchangeable.
Hawk Harrelson has grown on me over the years, but mainly because he is genuine and there is some appeal in authenticity. I would never say he’s good at what he does.
As a Giants fan, this is a fair ranking to me, at least the top 3. I might be a bit of a homer since I grew up with them, but I’d rather listen to Kruk/Kuip (or Miller/Flem) over Vin Scully (I also slightly prefer the Mets crew to Scully). That being said, Vin is still fantastic, which is unbelievable at his age. He gets bonus points for being, in Tony Stark’s words, ‘a living legend that kind of lives up to the legend’.
As a Giants fan, it’s a crying shame they ranked ahead of Gary Thorne & the Orioles ranked below them. It’s an even greater tragedy that the Cubs ranked ahead of them. (Given, I may be one of the few who doesn’t love Kruk & Kuip.)
Thorne is the best non-Vin Scully broadcaster in the game, and I wouldn’t be terribly upset if someone said he were better.
BRIAN ANDERSON IS THE BANE OF THE MILWAUKEE BREWERS. I still remember in 2008 when the Brewers made the playoffs (the Sabathia year) and they played the Phillies. Anderson was calling the game for TBS. Shane Victorino hit a devastating grand slam, and Brian called it with as much enthusiasm as if his 13 year old daughter had hit it. From that moment forward I knew he was a fraud. Uecker bleeds beer.
I moved to Wisconsin two years ago and watch a lot of Brewers baseball (thanks to getting FS Wisconsin). I cannot stand Brian Anderson. In fact, someone used very vile words because I mentioned my lack of interest in Anderson.
It’s nice to see I’m not the only one.
Kuiper and Krukow feed the general smugness of the Giant fan. Their broadcasts are littered with references to how great the Giant fan. Paeans to their greatness! This fan wore a funny hat! This fan has an adorable child in his own funny hat!
If a Giant fan catches a foul ball you’ll be treated almost every time to a comment about how Giant fans somehow bring gloves to games more often and catch more balls with them.
Krukow is especially inclined to cliches like, “all you future big leaguers out there pay attention.” His real specialty is “thinking along with the pitcher.” I would estimate that he tries to guess along with roughly 15-20 percent of all pitch calls. Please sir, may just watch the game without your expertise for just one glorious moment of ambient crowd noise?
Giant fans are particularly fond of commenting on how much they appreciate the duo explaining the game. This I understand as, clearly, all Giants fans need the game explained to them. Repeatedly and ad nauseum. So hurrah for the “best in the business” and the self-congratulatory circle they form with their acolytes.
I guess someone from the Giants peed in your cheerios…
This post does deserve a Fosse “wow”, but it also speaks some truths.
While I’m A’s fan, and many A’s fans seem to hate the Giants, I personally do not particularly care one way or another about the Giants and watch them periodically when ever the A’s aren’t playing. And IMO, the Giants broadcast team feels very, almost, little league style. So I wouldn’t just brush this post of as some sort of sour grapes over being a fan of the little brother in the bay area.
Kruk and Kuip spend a ton of time talking about just stupidly mundane stuff relating to baseball as if they are talking to 8 year olds. Not every play by Crawford has to be a teaching moment, guys…. And they certainly do play up the Giants brand/fandom a lot, which isn’t necessarily a fault, since you know, its mostly Giants fans watching. However, it does seem to feed the holier than you attitude many Giants fans exude. All of which is a stark contrast to Glen and Ray from the A’s. Both certainly have their faults (sometimes I really think Glen hates his job and Ray could talk a little less about catchers), but they are definitely not home-town-homers. Who is really magnificent from the A’s though is Ken Korach, especially when teamed up with Fosse on the radio. For some reason that duo over the radio is just amazing.
Fosse is a guy only a homer could love. The game has passed him by and he’s not particularly articulate. The A’s have tried to move him out using Hatteberg, Chavez etc. But he’s relatively harmless and definitely lovable in his way. You are spot on about Korach though. Great, sonorous voice and always on the side of class.
I actually am not a Giant hater. I grew up a Padres fan in SD and have taken on the A’s as my adoptive team. But I love Bochy and I appreciate the on field team the Giants roll out. I like John Miller.
But Krukow and Kuiper are intolerable. I understand that Giants fans are going to love them. There’s so much back patting it’s ridiculous. And with the Giants on their current run, it’s easy to justify.
I have mlb.tv so I’ve sampled all the team’s crews and this is honestly the only one that I find unwatchable. Krukow is really the problem. Kuiper’s dry, wry thing on it’s own is pretty vanilla. Not much to separate him and his brother actually. But man Krukow…so in love with his voice and his howdy doody act. Can it ever be a hat and not “a lid?” Does it always have to be a day “at the yard?”
Oh I certainly have a love-hate relationship with Fosse. One could make a drinking game out his post-game questions. Something like a drink for how many times he answers his own question while asking the question would have even the most hard core alcoholics under the table before Glen and Ray hand it off to the guys in the studio. (I should mention while asking a question, he will answer that same question usually multiple times, maybe even with a mean some where around 4.) His fawning over even half decent catchers gets really tiring and lord help you if a catcher does anything semi unusual, like a successful sacrifice bunt.
But on the other hand, he offers a decent amount of insight into the pitcher-catcher goings-on and that makes up, what, 90% of what you’re watching? That plus a relatively relaxed, non-homer attitude gets him pretty far in my book. And while him and Glen don’t bring up advanced metrics a ton, they do occasionally talk about them and usually in semi-intelligent fashion. They also take a very level headed opinion on broader issues going on in the league, when ever those come up. Really their biggest plus is that they don’t give you much to hate, which as the article talks about is a big deal over 162 games.
And with Kurach, that man’s game calls have nearly had me in tears during particularly dramatic games. He’s a true master of his trade.
I’ve been doing a Fosse asking interview questions routine for friends and family for years. You’re the first person I’ve ever encountered who also noticed it. High comedy.
“Josh it seems like when you go out there you’re looking to take that good opposite field approach…talk about how you made the transition and what went into looking for a pitch and trying to drive it the other way knowing that guys are trying to get you out inside and yet you just stay patient because when you roll over on a pitch you going to hit ground balls, hit into double plays…who was it that helped you work on that part of your game and how have you been so successful doing what you’ve been doing in trying to go the other way.”
And then there’s a long pause while the player tries to figure out what to answer.
Korach is also really fun to imitate. I suggest using the phrases: “he hits a HIGH fly ball….playable,” “and that’s how our ballgame begins today,” and “the lights have taken full effect,” in honing the Captain voice.
Oh man, you must not participate at athleticsnation much. Its a running joke over there for sure. And its kind of funny when talk of Fosse starts up. Most seem to be ok with him, but some have really strong feelings on both sides of the fence.
And I would love to be a fly on the wall when some A’s players discuss trying to answer Fosse questions. His questions are high comedy indeed. I love watching Glen’s facial expressions change during the process of a Fosse question too. Often can see the A’s player start smirking in the middle of a Fosse question, too. I’m sure its a running joke in the locker room.They should even have gag gifts at the end of the season for who got the best Fosse question.
Kruk & Kuip remind me of the two old guys from the Muppets.
This is spot on, Krukow is TERRIBLE. But watch out, that hurts the “SF narrative” that they have so carefully created. And look, I think Jon Miller, one of SF’s guys, is one of the best in all of MLB, he is amazing.
Grab some pine, meat,” shtick and all of his gloating about “3 in 5,” while carefully forgetting that the SF Giants existed for 52 years in San Francisco, prior to the “3 in 5” narrative, in which they were an amazing “0 for 52!” The SF TV broadcast is the worst on TV, maybe second worst, next to the White Sox, but that is simply because Hawk is unrivaled in his homerism. However, Krukow comes damn close at times. I watch nearly all of the A’s and Giants games, and the majority of SF games are Krukow waxing poetic about their “proud history,” again, 3 rings in 58 years is ehh, I’d say, all the while the TV crew circles the audience looking for “gamer babes,” or folks who have the audacity to wear an opposing teams jersey in the SF ballpark! He then circles said fan, either compliments them, typically if they are female, or disses them. It is disgusting. The irony is, for all that have been to the proud Oakland A’s franchise and watched games live in Oakland, every time there are a handful of lone wolf SF fans, who attended the game all by their lonesome, decked out in all SF gear, as if attempting to prove some kind of point. We get it, you’ve won 3 rings recently….but reminder, the Oakland A’s have won 4 in Oakland.
Again, Jon Miller is great, he represents SF very very well. Krukow is one of the worst in the business, the SF centric media (face it, social media algorithms gain much strength in the SF bay area) needs to stop elevating this sexist-out of touch broadcaster to some kind of idol. He is junk.
You seem to be having a hard time coping with the Giants’ recent success.
Yea, I don’t really care for them either. I think they come off as biased and at times a little arrogant, although they’re audience is mainly Giants fans so I guess the homerism is understandable.
Miller is top-notch, though.
What you call a “self-congratulatory circle” I call promoting the experience at the ballpark. The Giants do have the longest active sellout streak in MLB right now and unlike other parks I could name, fans actually remain engaged in the game throughout vs. playing with beach balls, doing the wave, or heading for the exits by the 7th inning if the home team is trailing. You can say that winning accounts for most of that (and the sellout streak especially) but for the most part that’s been the atmosphere at least since AT&T opened and Kruk & Kuip have played a big part in creating that. Are there really more fans with gloves at Giants games than at other parks? I don’t know and I don’t really care. On the other hand, what’s wrong with encouraging people to do so?
My only problem with the standard of fandom they promote is the constant hectoring of any adult male who catches a foul ball to instantly give it up to their date or to the nearest little kid or else they’re a bad human being. Having never caught a ball in 25+ years of going to games, I can tell you right now if I ever do get one they can keep the camera on me and try to shame me the rest of the game and I’m still not giving it up to some stupid kid. My wife, maybe. But that will at least be a negotiation.
I think what you a described is what rubs people the wrong way, though, because it gives outsiders the impression that the Giants are “better”. So it comes across as a bit snooty.
I dunno. There’s nothing wrong with promotion, but I guess to me the Giants already have the most beautiful park in the league, and coupling that with all the on-field accomplishments makes it seem like they’re trying too hard to sell something that’s already a major success.
The longest “announced sell-out streak,” because let me tell you, as a fan that has attended many games during that “streak,” it is often not close to being an actual “sellout,” yet Krukow will announce “yet another sellout,” with absolutely NO SHAME. It is sad. It is so much a part of the SF imagine and narrative that they and the local Bay Area media as a whole, have so carefully created. Sickening really.
Oh they do the wave in SF – least you forgot 49ers fans doing the wave a few years back as a player was carted off of the filed with life threatening injuries? Lets not get that twisted. The fans at that park also largely root as their own team hits into a double-play, it is actually quite funny, but makes sense when you see the folks who are in attendance.
I do agree with the premise of the rest of your post, however. Just not the sellout thing or the crowd at large there at AT&T
I thought Harold Reynolds was acknowledged as the best in the business?
I am shocked how high the SF broadcast teams finished. I just cannot fathom how anyone could like them. They’re like nails on a chalkboard to me.
Likely a Hawk Harrelson fan I’m sure.
I grew up in Chicago, so I’ve heard literally hundreds of Hawk’s broadcasts. Maybe close to a thousand. The thing is, I’m a Cubs fan, so I have no love for Hawk. And now that I live in Northern California, I have no love for these guys. In fact, Hawk is their closest comparable. Like Hawk, they’re larded down with terrible slogans and catchphrases (“torture” much? What about grabbing some pine, meat?). Like Hawk, they’re inveterate homers. And like Hawk, they’re largely ignorant of how the game is played. They’re terrible at their chosen profession, and they fit their terrible fanbase to a T.
I wouldn’t call them “nails on a chalkboard” but they are huge homers, and that’s some thing that people seem to otherwise criticize so I don’t really understand why they get a pass.
Maybe it was just me, but I interpreted the survey as asking for each person to vote only for their teams broadcasters. So if others thought like me, then it probably stands to reason that crews with an obvious bias would rate higher than crews with other flaws since fans are likely to be okay with a bias in their teams favor.
It would be interesting to redo the survey, but this time ask fans to rate any broadcasters they are familiar with and see how the numbers change.
As a Mets fan, it’s really incredible to have Gary, Keith, and Ron as our team. I think the quality of some of the national broadcast teams has improved significantly over the years, and they still clearly aren’t on the same level as GKR. Last night I was switching back and forth between the SNY and ESPN broadcasts of the Mets game, and was actually quite impressed with the quality of the Wednesday Night Baseball crew. But the Mets’ crew – it’s nice that they have two strong analysts who are able to provide expertise on pitching, hitting, and defense – but the real star is Gary Cohen. He engages the analysts and gets the best out of them, expertly asking follow-up questions in a way which does not undermine their expertise. In this multi-screen age, Gary’s experience coming from radio makes putting on SNY and only sporadically looking up at the TV from one of my other devices something I look forward to every night. When people ask “what’s wrong with baseball” I think it’s not an issue with the sport itself but generally that many of the other broadcast teams are simply not up to that standard with how people consume media these days.
Look, obviously I’m biased and don’t hear every crew as much as I’ve heard these guys, but I think anyone who *has* heard all of them and doesn’t come away thinking GKR is in a class by themselves must have some interesting criteria on which to judge.
It’s interesting that you specifically highlight Cohen because of the three he’s the only one I’m not too familiar with, and I was a bit surprised to see the Mets rank so highly. I’ve never been a fan of Darling (he seems like a bit of a homer) and Hernandez has always struck me as a little stuck up. If Cohen makes that big a difference then I’ll have to check him out.
Keith can be a little stuck up at times, but he seems to be pretty self-aware about it. For me, his value is mostly in his subtle quips and one-liners. Ron is OK, but I think Gary is fantastic at both calling the game and providing fun banter. The three just have this dynamic together where they can makes jokes about each other and all share a genuine laugh
Yeah, they just have fantastic chemistry, are specifically *not homers* which Met fans have always appreciated bc they/we are mostly used to the periods of long suffering and we want to be spoken to straight up, and are knowledgable (without being pedantic), affable and professional.
As mentioned before they are not without their faults, but taken as a whole they are a great crew and Met fans know how fortunate they are to have them together this long.
And as many have said, Gary is the gem that makes it all work. And as great as he is, his radio counterpart, Howie Rose, might even be better. Yeah, he’s that good.
I guess I’m alone in disliking Vin Scully. Always have, always will. And I’ve listened to him since the 70s. His stories just drone on and on and on. He’s just too laid-back, west coast for me.
I’m apparently also alone in liking Hawk Harrelson. There’s no shame in being a homer, and I’ve enjoyed him since he did Red Sox games way back in the day.
Speaking of the Red Sox, I wish somebody would please show Remy the door. Unfortunately the pink-hatters appear to love him. Eckersley is far, far better. It seems like Remy gets his talking points for the season from NESN and then just beats them to death. This year it’s defensive positioning. You’d think teams just started employing shifts yesterday. Every game this year it’s defensive positioning, defensive positioning, defensive positioning. Plus O’Brien sometimes has to pull teeth to get anything out of Remy when he falls into disinterested mode… which is often.
You like Hawk and dislike Vin.
You must be some sort of proto hipster that we haven’t caught up with yet.
Would be interesting to hear a similar rundown of radio crews fwiw…
I’m a Mets fan, and I love GKR. I think the national broadcast teams are awful and the local Mets rivals teams are also awful. I can’t speak to SF, but I am surprised to see them ahead of GKR although I know they have a great reputation.
The bigger point I was going to make was that, as a fan, I understand why so many people worry about baseball not reaching a younger/broader audience. Much of that has to do with the broadcast teams.
When I am stuck with a PHI, ATL or NYY broadcast I legitimately fear for the future of the game, because I *love* baseball but am so bored/turned-off by their broadcasts. I may not have become a fan or consume as frequently if I wasn’t blessed with Gary Cohen and Bob Murphy my entire life.
With that all said, thank you Fangraphs for putting this together. The way the sport we love is consumed is extremely important. Perhaps calling attention to this – even in a non-serious manner – will spawn some discussion on how to improve the experience and reach fans better.
The Mets broadcast team is literally the reason I became a Mets fan. I don’t live anywhere near New York, or any other team, so I didn’t have a permanent team I cheered for. But when I first got MLB.tv in 2009 I watched every team’s broadcast and settled on the Mets as the best, most engaging, and easiest to listen to. Now I’m a full time Mets fan and watch their games almost exclusively. So I think there’s something true in your comments. I tried watching a Nationals broadcast recently and found it nearly unbearable. If that was all I had access to there’s a good chance I wouldn’t be watching baseball; I’d just be reading about it online.
Very good rankings, Vin Scully is easily the greatest living broadcaster, and his knowledge of his team as well as the opposing team is the gold standard, not to mention his voice, which has the perfect cadence for the game of baseball.
The SF love is still outlandish, mainly because Mike Krukow is horrible, despite all SF fans brainwashed belief to think otherwise. Whenever I ask a SF friend what makes him great, the only response is, “he is just the best.” Yep, circling girls in the audience and declaring them “Gamer Babes,” while day in and day out displaying a complete lack of knowledge of every opposing team that they face, or his “grab some pine, meat,” shtick, or any of his tired shticks, are now very sad (but play perfectly to their new fanbase that believes MLB was just created back in 2010). Nothing like clicking over to the Giants game to watch while the TV crew searches for SF fans in the audience, it is nauseating. I also enjoyed his accusations that Tulo steals signs, or his calling Puig stupid, etc. etc., he is just a horrible broadcaster. However, Jon Miller and Dave Flemming are very very good. Jon Miller might be the second best in all of MLB, behind Vin Scully.
Staying in the Bay Area, the Oakland A’s radio guy, Ken Korach, is vastly underrated! That man can call a game and has a beautiful baseball voice, deep knowledge, and a cadence that rivals even the greatest of all time, Vin Scully.
Moving to the Midwest, I always enjoyed listening to the Cubs and Brewers broadcasts, so again, spot on rankings here. Just, the love of Krukow and the power of the SF-centric bias, their love of a broadcaster who is just awful and the lack of shame that follows due to SF’s power and influence on social media, uh. Celebrate Jon Miller and Flemming or the Kuiper brothers or Ken Korach, all vastly superior to an old man circling girls from the crowd.
I can’t stand Kruk & Kuip, at all. I tend to have many of the same reasons for disliking them as you (being grating homers, stupid statements, searching for girls like creeps in the press box).
I’ve lived in Wisconsin for two years now and find Brian Anderson to be average at best.
No Giants fan actually says that Mike Krukow is the best. He is easily the worst of the four broadcasters the team has. However, he is much, much better than a lot of the color guys many other teams have (just in the NL West, Jeff Huson, Mark Grace, and Mark Grant are all worse), and while he certainly has his grating schticks (I could be wrong but I think he’s toned down the “grab some pine, meat” bit), he is generally objective about the play on the field. Both Kruk and Kuip, obviously, are homers for the city, the stadium, and the organization, but they do not much bemoan calls on the field that go against the Giants, or do dumb things like predict home runs (I’ve heard Mark Grace do this on a number of occasions following a Dbacks batter fouling a pitch off).
What a Giants fan will say is that their broadcast team is the best. Like you said, Jon Miller is outstanding, Dave Flemming is wonderful too, and even Duane Kuiper is very good at what he does. A lot of the Krukow hate, while somewhat understandable, is still misplaced, and honestly comes off as bitterness. Pay less attention to his comments about the fans and more to what he says about the play on the field. You might be surprised about how objective he actually is.
This hits the nail on the head. It seems like most of the hate is directed at stylistic issues rather than how the game is called. Everyone has their schtick, and not everyone is going to like it. When it comes to calling a game with minimal bias, SFs team is one of the best. Of course they love the organization and brag about the park, but I rarely hear them mention the WS wins as another poster said.
I concur.
One thing I like about Krukow is the Empire scouting. I never hear about it in other broadcasts. It is great to know his tendencies before the game even starts.
As a Giants’ fan (and a Mariners’ fan), I disagree that Krukow is easily the worst on the Giants – I think he comes up with very good insights, as you say, and while he’s best known for working with Kuiper, he also works well with Miller and Flemming. I do agree that Kuip and Kruk want the Giants to win, but they’re fair when describing controversial plays, and are very complementary towards the opposing players (when they deserve it) with good analysis of their strengths and weaknesses.
Now, I did get annoyed with Kruk and Kuip last year, when they were way too kind to Angel Pagan when he was playing through injury and performed horribly, while Kruk was too harsh with Brandon Belt last year when he didn’t do perfectly. (Quite a few Giants’ fans on McCovey Chronicles were very harsh in condemning Krukow’s comments concerning Pagan and Belt, which doesn’t fit Ryan M’s trolling narrative.)
I certainly wouldn’t say the Mariners’ announcers are the best in the game – they were certainly closer to that when Dave Niehaus was alive and announcing. Dave Sims has enthusiasm but doesn’t offer much in insights. Mike Blowers does offer insights and doesn’t spout a lot of cliches; the telecast suffers when he’s not part of it. Aaron Goldsmith, who primarily does radio but does some TV play-by-play, was reliant on cliches a couple years ago, but he offers more insights and is more interesting these days.
West coast getting madd love in these rankings. I’m pretty okay with this top 10 tho. Glad to see LAD, SF, SD, CHC, BAL in there. Still think Hawk should be in the top 10 however! =]
I am 31 years old. Does anyone in my age bracket like Vin Scully or is it a generational thing? He puts me to sleep plain and simple. I understand the legacy and tradition aspect of his rankings here but I’d rather listen to Hawk (who I can’t stand) and chuckle.
I’m similarly-aged; I think you’re in the minority, no matter the age group. However, I certainly wouldn’t have him first (that’s the Mets-GKR, obv), and I think SF and Baltimore are better.
I’m not really a fan of Scilly either. I don’t think I could sit through him for an entire game.
I’m in the same range, and feel about the same. Baseball is a game of tradition, and he’s been around almost as long as the oldest ones. I’d love to sit and talk with him about baseball, without question, but he doesn’t actually call games in my opinion. It’s like the game is going on somewhere peripherally that merits occasional acknowledgment rather than primary attention. I think that killed it for me was an LAD/SF game where he talked about Freddy Sanchez’s club foot every. single. time. he came to the plate.
I’m sure he’s slipped a bit over the last 15 years, which really has lost a generation of fans. Growing up I had no way of hearing his broadcast, and by the time I did, he was already spending two innings talking about his bladder issues (which I’ll admit is hilarious and worth listening to).
It’s been just a little sad listening to Vin lately, giving that now he says the wrong player name and misidentifies pitches a few times a game. Even now though, he obviously bring something completely irreplaceable. Not much else to say. It’s the end of an era.
Even though I am a damn dumb Dodger fan, I have grown to like the Giants crew quite a bit.
Vin does make a few mistakes, but the quality of his overall broadcast is far more than a relic. He still articulates the narratives that spring ups each game, and carry them through till the end beautifully.
Meta-comment: I’m a little concerned that this comment section will encourage (or make visible) people down-voting comments simply because they disagree. I think Reddit’s rules should apply: down-vote things that don’t contribute to the discussion, or are inflammatory, but if you just disagree with an otherwise well-stated and courteous comment, leave it be.
Edit: please show whether you agree with me by voting on this comment.
It never works at Reddit, good luck getting it to work here. De-emphasizing or removing Internet Points voting systems is the only way to get around the often-perverse psychological incentives they create.
Completely agree, and it’s kinda bumming me out.
I have never understood the demand for an up-vote/down-vote system.
I think showing the net vote is the best solution. That, or only allow people five downvotes per day.
Honestly, who really cares? If you get 1000 up votes or 1000 down votes it means nothing. Its a completely meaningless and mostly arbitrary system. In two days no one will even pay attention to the article any more. Why waste any time or effort worrying about how it works or doesnt work?
Even provided you are able to achieve such a total Zen detachment with respect to your own discursive behavior (which I don’t actually think many of us can, since protest all you like we naturally do care what others think of what we say) it still affects the words other people type into the little box. When people think they’re out to score points with an audience, they talk differently.
Frankly I think the entire up/down vote thing is silly.
How much ballot stuffing was going on here? Given the Giants’ unnaturally high finish, I’d guess a lot.
Hello, Obvious Giants Hater. Perhaps you forgot about the Royals debacle of the most recent past, almost getting Infante selected to the ASG. Every team with recent success (particularly with long-suffering fanbases) are going to have bandwagoners who vote in the extreme. Your team has done it, my team has done it. All you did here was show your sour grapes…
Lazy comment, not fit for Fangraphs. The Giants’ announcers finished third in the last Fangraphs TV rankings, first in the most recent TV announcer rankings from Awful Announcing readers (ahead of the Dodgers, Orioles, Mets, and Cubs). It’s hardly a unique result, and easy to look up.
The Giants crew is mostly good, but as a Rockies fan I haven’t forgotten their penchant for accusing the Rox of cheating based abolutely zero evidence.
The Giants crew is mostly good, but as a Rockies fan I haven’t forgotten their penchant for accusing the Rox of cheating based absolutely zero evidence.
listening to Krukow is like listening to your drunk uncle try to chat up your 20 year old friends at a Christmas party