The Best Thing About Hunter and Bordick Calling a Game is ...

[mdbdotcom]

... I get to turn off the game audio and listen to music while I watch the game.

And you?

[thezeroes]

I have never watched an Oriole game were an announcer has any bearing on whether I enjoy it or not. If the announcers need to fit some kind of little niche to enjoy the game then someone may be watching for the wrong reason.

[Aristotelian]

...they make watching water boil seem entertaining.

[BarclaySouthway]

2 hours ago, thezeroes said:

I have never watched an Oriole game were an announcer has any bearing on whether I enjoy it or not. If the announcers need to fit some kind of little niche to enjoy the game then someone may be watching for the wrong reason.

I'll still enjoy it.  There are degrees of enjoyment. Like eating ice cream.

I used to love the old Jon Miller/Brooks Robinson combo back in the day.  That was a Haagen-Dazs/ Ben and Jerry's experience.  Hunter and Bordick is Breyer's at best.  I'm still eating the hell out of the Breyer's, mind you. 

 

[mdbdotcom]

2 hours ago, thezeroes said:

I have never watched an Oriole game were an announcer has any bearing on whether I enjoy it or not. If the announcers need to fit some kind of little niche to enjoy the game then someone may be watching for the wrong reason.

Why turn off the game when it's just the announcers you don't enjoy. As I wrote, I turn off the sound and listen to music while I watch the game. Sorry you didn't understand.

[Frobby]

Announcers definitely impact how much I enjoy a game, but I'll take Hunter and Bordick announcing a win over Thorne and Palmer announcing a loss any day.   

[Drifter]

3 hours ago, mdbdotcom said:

... I get to turn off the game audio and listen to music while I watch the game.

And you?

I do the same thing. You really don't want to know what I call them when they are the video crew..

[spiritof66]

2 hours ago, thezeroes said:

I have never watched an Oriole game were an announcer has any bearing on whether I enjoy it or not. If the announcers need to fit some kind of little niche to enjoy the game then someone may be watching for the wrong reason.

Palmer adds to my enjoyment of a game, and often to my knowledge of baseball. If I'm doing something else while watching -- following the game thread, reading, etc. -- he keeps me much more focused on the game, especially between pitches. If it's Bordick, I get a lot more done other than watching the game. For me, two very different experiences.

[thezeroes]

36 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

Why turn off the game when it's just the announcers you don't enjoy. As I wrote, I turn off the sound and listen to music while I watch the game. Sorry you didn't understand.

I understood what you were saying.  I was just adding into the conversation that I have never in my life turned on an Oriole game and said "Oh, "They" are doing this game, I guess I will turn it off."  I do not need the announcers to watch, same as you.  I just need a clear picture and timely replays.

[sammyt]

For me, it's less about the individual announcer / color guy than it is a couple of cardinal sins that grate over the course of a season, most of which have been discussed here, but here's how I'd capture it:

1) Hyperbole.    Many baseball fans have an analytical mind, and there's no way faster to alienate analytical types than to hand out superlatives daily, when undeserved and just to fill in time and try to add punch to the show.  Demper is the king of hyperbole (perhaps that's a bit of hyperbole itself, but it's hard to argue).    You lose credibility when you name six or seven different players who hit the longest home runs in the league.   It's mindless and it insults viewers who have a deep love for the thinking part of the game.

2) Unctiousness / effusiveness:    a cousin of hyperbole, a constant flow of positivity and smaller compliments becomes grating.  Hunter does this; and I'm sorry to digress, but the few times I've encountered Hunter out of the booth he is a real sourpuss, so hearing the constant treacle is annoying.   I'd rather he announce more like Walter Mattheau; which is close to his personality off-set.   Or at least develop a wit, like Thorne.   A good wit covers up a lot of other things.

3) Bad habits of jargon / failure to mix:   Someone pointed out that one announcer constantly uses the phrase "punch out," and while it's a small thing, it would be thoughtful if the announcers could self-audit a little bit and try to develop a more expansive way to describe things.   They are well paid for it.

4) Tabasco:   Palmer does a great job of avoiding the treacle and dabbing on the hot sauce.   He never humiliates players or coaches, but he does point out flaws and offer insights that educate us.   Most viewers are always trying to understand the details of what can make a player / team better.  How can you possibly learn that when the tools of the announcer's trade are 1 - 3 above?  

I know I said it wasn't about the individuals and then I digressed to mentioning several, but EVERYONE could improve with a little self-analysis.

I wonder what the editorial instructions are to the MASN crew about club image / maintaining non-critical views?  Does anyone know this?   I get the sense that Palmer (thankfully) operates outside the rules because he is Palmer.    It'd be great to see some active work by everyone on scaling back on the first couple of items.

[mdbdotcom]

28 minutes ago, thezeroes said:

I understood what you were saying.  I was just adding into the conversation that I have never in my life turned on an Oriole game and said "Oh, "They" are doing this game, I guess I will turn it off."  I do not need the announcers to watch, same as you.  I just need a clear picture and timely replays.

I never have either. I just turn off the sound.

[InsideCoroner]

13 minutes ago, sammyt said:

For me, it's less about the individual announcer / color guy than it is a couple of cardinal sins that grate over the course of a season, most of which have been discussed here, but here's how I'd capture it:

1) Hyperbole.    Many baseball fans have an analytical mind, and there's no way faster to alienate analytical types than to hand out superlatives daily, when undeserved and just to fill in time and try to add punch to the show.  Demper is the king of hyperbole (perhaps that's a bit of hyperbole itself, but it's hard to argue).    You lose credibility when you name six or seven different players who hit the longest home runs in the league.   It's mindless and it insults viewers who have a deep love for the thinking part of the game.

2) Unctiousness / effusiveness:    a cousin of hyperbole, a constant flow of positivity and smaller compliments becomes grating.  Hunter does this; and I'm sorry to digress, but the few times I've encountered Hunter out of the booth he is a real sourpuss, so hearing the constant treacle is annoying.   I'd rather he announce more like Walter Mattheau; which is close to his personality off-set.   Or at least develop a wit, like Thorne.   A good wit covers up a lot of other things.

3) Bad habits of jargon / failure to mix:   Someone pointed out that one announcer constantly uses the phrase "punch out," and while it's a small thing, it would be thoughtful if the announcers could self-audit a little bit and try to develop a more expansive way to describe things.   They are well paid for it.

4) Tabasco:   Palmer does a great job of avoiding the treacle and dabbing on the hot sauce.   He never humiliates players or coaches, but he does point out flaws and offer insights that educate us.   Most viewers are always trying to understand the details of what can make a player / team better.  How can you possibly learn that when the tools of the announcer's trade are 1 - 3 above?  

I know I said it wasn't about the individuals and then I digressed to mentioning several, but EVERYONE could improve with a little self-analysis.

I wonder what the editorial instructions are to the MASN crew about club image / maintaining non-critical views?  Does anyone know this?   I get the sense that Palmer (thankfully) operates outside the rules because he is Palmer.    It'd be great to see some active work by everyone on scaling back on the first couple of items.

Nice first post. Agreed on all accounts.

[Dreadnought]

3 hours ago, sammyt said:

2) Unctiousness / effusiveness:   a cousin of hyperbole, a constant flow of positivity and smaller compliments becomes grating.  Hunter does this; and I'm sorry to digress, but the few times I've encountered Hunter out of the booth he is a real sourpuss, so hearing the constant treacle is annoying.   I'd rather he announce more like Walter Mattheau; which is close to his personality off-set.   Or at least develop a wit, like Thorne.   A good wit covers up a lot of other things.

 

Thanks for confirming what a lot of us suspected.   A triple A phony.    Probably a nasty, passive aggressive guy, anyway, but he was brought in to replace Miller to well deserved abuse.  Wouldn't be surprised if the bitterness lingers.   

[Beef Supreme]

3 Bad Habits of Jargon

Every game, one or both starting pitchers "labored through" according to Bordick. Precisely one-half of thé time he means it as a compliment. The other half of the time it is used as a critique. If you have watched the whole game closely, you might get it right as to which he means. If you haven't been watching closely, Bordick has failed to communicate anything with the cliche.

[Beef Supreme]

8 minutes ago, Dreadnought said:

Thanks for confirming what a lot of us suspected.   A triple A phony.    Probably a nasty, passive aggressive guy, anyway, but he was brought in to replace Miller to well deserved abuse.  Wouldn't be surprised if the bitterness lingers.   

You mean Jon Miller?