There has been a lot written in the baseball blogosphere about the demise of ESPN’s Baseball Tonight. Once one of my favorite shows, it has become nearly unwatchable over the last handful of years. There are really two major problems with BBTN, the personalities and the format. I’ll discuss each in turn.

The Personalities

The talking heads that frequently appear on BBTN include former players Harold Reynolds, Jeff Brantley, Rob Dibble, and John Kruk as well as writers/analysts Peter Gammons and Tim Kurkjian. The latter two are excellent contributors to the show; they provide insights and information about the players and the game, each exhibiting his own unique style. Neither Gammons nor Kurkjian are perfect, but they are welcome beakons of reason in an otherwise barren intellectual landscape. It is the former players that really hurt the show.

Harold Reynolds does a nice job of commentating on the Little League World Series, but his knowledge of baseball is archaic and his distaste for preparation is obvious. Why do background research when you can simply spout off incoherently about your own career? Reynolds’ shining moment came a few weeks ago when he ranted and raved about “clogging up the basepaths,” arguing that a high on-base percentage is unimportant and that the ability to run fast is a far more important skill. Sluggers like Jason Giambi, Jim Thome, and Frank Thomas, Reynolds “argued,” just get in the way of base stealers like Corey Patterson and Jimmy Rollins. While his assertions are patently absurd to anyone with even a cursory understanding of baseball, it is obvious that Reynolds’ opinions are derived from his own career as a low-OBP, speedy second-baseman. Reynolds also exemplifies the “golden age” mentality, often reminiscing about “the good old days” when men were men and he was a baseball player. Does his “analysis” add anything to the viewer’s understanding of the game? Rarely. But Reynolds is never forced to defend his assertions, and his tired, cliche-ridden vocabulary goes unchallenged by BBTN’s other “experts.”

As poor as Reynolds’ contributions to the show are, Jeff Brantley’s level of incompetence is unmatched. The former-pitcher is the epitome of the “old baseball man,” constantly questioning the machismo of today’s players and fondly remembering the “good old days.” His most persistent theme is the purpose pitch, something Brantley considers a lost art. An opponent hit a home run off of you? Throw at him. Someone is digging in at the plate? Throw at him. A batter squared around to bunt? Throw at him. In fact, it seems that there is rarely a situation where Brantley would not advocate throwing at a hitter. Beyond this thinly veiled proclivity toward violence, the Alabama-native doesn’t have much at all to contribute, choosing instead to rely on cliches about “knowing how to win” and “doing the little things.”

One of the longest tenured talking heads, Rob Dibble is a prototypical “dumb jock.” The co-host of Dan Patrick’s Radio Show, Dibble is a fan of tattoos, motorcycles, scantily-clad women, cigarettes, and alcohol. He is a “man’s man,” and he can be entertaining when taken for what he is. As an analyst on a baseball program, however, his poor vocabulary and almost total reliance on personal experience prove devastating. A believer in the same cliches as Brantley, apparently required for membership in the “former MLB pitchers’ fraternity,” Dibble rarely has anything new or unique to contribute. And like Reynolds, his lack of preparation is apparent and disappointing. When one’s job is to comment on baseball, watching the games and doing a bit of research shouldn’t be too much to ask.

The newest member of the BBTN staff is John Kruk, a former Phillie whose most recent gig was on Fox Sports Net’s Best Damned Sports Show Period. Kruk is the most palatable of the former players, but he seems to be unaware of the skills that made him such a valuable player during his career. With a lifetime .397 on-base average and 133 OPS+, Kruk was one of his league’s best hitters for much of the early 1990s. The poster child for undervalued talent, the portly first-baseman with meek home run power should appreciate the insights provided by “Moneyball“-style analysis. Instead, he appears to subscribe to the same tired beliefs of his BBTN cohorts, evangelizing the importance of “making things happen,” “being aggressive,” and “making productive outs.” Only a few months into his tenure, Kruk still has time to improve. So far, however, he has been more of the same on a show that badly needs an injection of fresh blood.

The Format

It’s not just the commentators that have led to BBTN’s downfall, however. The show has deviated from its original format in an apparent attempt to increase its appeal with a younger demographic. Instead of placing primary emphasis on the games, ESPN has instead made the talking heads the focus of the show. Segments with monikers like “Second Guessing” and “Around The Horn” and the various “debates” have turned the show into a roundtable for the spouting of cliches. The length of highlights has been reduced in order to accommodate the analysts and many games are now only covered with a line score. This is simply unacceptable for a show that bills itself as a comprehensive look at the world of Major League Baseball.

Even the positive changes, like the addition of “box score”-style stats to the score graphics, have done little to improve the show. For one thing, there is little discussion of stats beyond batting average, home runs, and RBI. While Gammons and Kurkjian occasionally add references to OPS or other more advanced metrics, they are the exception and not the rule. In fact, there is little discussion of statistics at all. Analysts routinely make assertions about the value of a given player without any reference to supporting numbers. Often, these assertions are unquestionably false. Do the other BBTN guys “call out” their peers in these situations? Not a chance.

One of the main reasons for the format’s shortcomings is the work of the show’s host, Carl Ravech. Tasked with managing the program, the arrogant Ravech insists on manufacturing controversies while slipping his own ill-advised opinions into discussions whenever possible. This has the effect of further cluttering the show, which often includes a pair of former players in addition to Ravech. When a fourth member is added to the crew, you can forget about fluidly moving through the highlights and segments. Instead of getting in-depth on any issue, BBTN addresses a multitude of topics in stunning shallowness. And more often than not, this “coverage” is code for cliches… lots and lots of cliches.

The problems with BBTN are obvious, but ESPN seems unwilling to implement the necessary changes that would return the show to its former glory. Most likely, the lack of competition from another network means there is little motivation to improve the product. Fox’s This Week In Baseball is the only other national program dedicated to baseball, and it airs only once a week. Until a real alternative emerges, I’m afraid that we can expect more of the same sub-par quality from BBTN.

Next time, I will discuss some steps that ESPN could take to improve Baseball Tonight. Until then, feel free to email me with any comments about the program or the analysis above.