Must Gary Thorne be a doomsday prophet?

[ShannieDC]

6th out of 32 aint bad

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1146624-mlb-tv-power-rankings-ranking-every-mlb-teams-announcers-heading-into-2012/page/26

[furryburres]

The rapport he has with Palmer is terrific and they're far and away the best MASN announcer combo. To complain about Thorne seems to imply you prefer the alternative, or else you're just unable to keep your opinion to yourself.

So people have to choose between the two? It's either "I prefer Thorne" or "I prefer Hunter", and it can't be "I wish both would get better"? Why is that inference so obvious?

[RichmondVA Orio]

You mean like fans who are so insecure that they can't handle an announcer being mildly critical of the team or getting excited when the other team makes a nice play?

Nope. Not at all. He can get excited about good baseball all he wants. However, I would prefer a play by play guy that is a lot like its manager. Someone with a "can do" attitude.

Thorne, to me, embodies someone expecting the Orioles to continue their losing ways. A self fulfilling prophecy type of guy. Stater of the obvious. Ho hum.

[furryburres]

Nope. Not at all. He can get excited about good baseball all he wants. However, I would prefer a play by play guy that is a lot like its manager. Someone with a "can do" attitude.

Thorne, to me, embodies someone expecting the Orioles to continue their losing ways. A self fulfilling prophecy type of guy. Stater of the obvious. Ho hum.

I don't think that's fair. People applaud Palmer for speaking his mind, for being critical when it's called for, whether over the minutiae of a play or the game plan of a manager. I don't see how it's so far off for a play by play guy to do that too. I'd just like it if he ALSO did a good play-by-play.

[Capn Vivi]

So people have to choose between the two? It's either "I prefer Thorne" or "I prefer Hunter", and it can't be "I wish both would get better"? Why is that inference so obvious?

I know who I would rather listen to, do you?

[Guest rochester]

Thorne and Palmer are a great team and entertaining - the synergy provides some priceless moments. What, he calls it like it is? How can he do that when he's dumb? On TV I can see the play so the play-by-play doesn't mean a lot - analysis is. However, he could have never, ever been a baseball announcer back when I listened to games on my transistor radio. Coming from, a minor league town that also meant canned crowd noise which had me for awhile until I could hear the same SOB laugh the same laugh about every minute in the loop.

Ma, those were the days.

[PaulFolk]

Not that you were asking me... but YES absolutely! I would, without a doubt want my team to have their TV play by play guy to speak confiidently about its palyers during a playoff run. This team needs to EXPEL all those who are unsure about its ability.

Peter Angelos agrees with you. And that's why Jon Miller was fired.

[furryburres]

I know who I would rather listen to, do you?

The point isn't that everyone can or can't choose, it's that people shouldn't be forced to settle for "who is better".

[Old_Bay_Oriole]

I don't think that's fair. People applaud Palmer for speaking his mind, for being critical when it's called for, whether over the minutiae of a play or the game plan of a manager. I don't see how it's so far off for a play by play guy to do that too. I'd just like it if he ALSO did a good play-by-play.

Palmer and Thorne are completely different. I wouldn't really call Thorne critical as much as I'd just call him obnoxious and annoying. I don't think you need to let out a war whoop scream every time the other team hits a home run, and I don't think the only alternative means you have to be silent. You can note another team's accomplishments and your team's failings without being too far in either direction. Palmer understands this and knows when to call a spade a spade and he also knows when pointing out that "the Orioles give up ANOTHER home run!!!" in an exasperated tone likeThorne does isn't necessary or likely to be received well. The main difference is that Palmer's criticism is constructive and is backed up with years of experience on and off the field, while Thorne is an expert at pointing out the obvious.

And the Hunter or Thorne dichotomy is silly. As another poster pointed out, you're allowed to have issues with both.

[furryburres]

Palmer and Thorne are completely different. I wouldn't really call Thorne critical as much as I'd just call him obnoxious and annoying. I don't think you need to let out a war whoop scream every time the other team hits a home run, and I don't think the only alternative means you have to be silent. You can note another team's accomplishments and your team's failings without being too far in either direction. Palmer understands this and knows when to call a spade a spade and he also knows when pointing out that "the Orioles give up ANOTHER home run!!!" in an exasperated tone likeThorne does isn't necessary or likely to be received well. The main difference is that Palmer's criticism is constructive and is backed up with years of experience on and off the field, while Thorne is an expert at pointing out the obvious.

As the color guy, Palmer's job is to bring up those things. He's the one with the experience. As the play-by-play guy, Thorne's job is to point out the obvious. So when he sounds exasperated, he probably is. So what?

And the Hunter or Thorne dichotomy is silly. As another poster pointed out, you're allowed to have issues with both.

The point isn't that everyone can or can't choose, it's that people shouldn't be forced to settle for "who is better".

That was me.

[Old_Bay_Oriole]

As the color guy, Palmer's job is to bring up those things. He's the one with the experience. As the play-by-play guy, Thorne's job is to point out the obvious. So when he sounds exasperated, he probably is. So what?

So its annoying to hear him get just as excited when the other team scores as when the O's do. He also has an awful, piercing voice. Just clone Palmer, someone

That was me.

I was actually thinking of SirMeowMeow, but you can have some credit too

[furryburres]

So its annoying to hear him get just as excited when the other team scores as when the O's do. He also has an awful, piercing voice. Just clone Palmer, someone

I was actually thinking of SirMeowMeow, but you can have some credit too

It's an exciting play. That's baseball. Why not get excited when something exciting happens? So you can sound like a grumpy fanboy? It doesn't mean he's happy about it. It's just a play that changes the anatomy and gameplan of an entire game with the swing of a bat, and such a radical change deserves excitement.

I was just pointing out that I wasn't behind the dichotomy, not that I deserved the credit for rejecting it.

[$Greatness$]

Gary Thorne and Jim Palmer are instant classics. We're lucky to have 'em.

Have we forgotten the epic game 6 call from Thorne?!

THAT COULD BE US THIS YEAR!!!!

lulz

[Old_Bay_Oriole]

It's an exciting play. That's baseball. Why not get excited when something exciting happens? So you can sound like a grumpy fanboy? It doesn't mean he's happy about it. It's just a play that changes the anatomy and gameplan of an entire game with the swing of a bat, and such a radical change deserves excitement.

Again, either be excited or be a grumpy fanboy aren't the only options

[furryburres]

Again, either be excited or be a grumpy fanboy aren't the only options

I understand that, but what you do expect from him? When an exciting play happens, the default human reaction is excitement. A guy watching a game, not rooting for either team, will either feel excitement for every exciting play or exciting for no play. So asking him to pick and choose which plays he gets excited about, asking him to limit his excitement to only those plays that his team generates, is necessarily asking him to act like grumpy fan boy.

If excitement is shown on a scale of 1 to 10, and the default human reaction is at 10, asking him to keep the excitement for opposing team's play down to a 5 while simultaneously keeping excitement for his own plays at a 10 (as opposed to keeping them both at 5, which would on our scale be a reserved and cool observer of events), is necessarily asking him to act like a grumpy fanboy.