I liked Kruk. I'd love to be able to go back and re-watch some of the games he did to see whether my memory is accurate. He brought up a lot of great points and asked great questions. For example, he asked why there are so many meetings in softball. It's a great question. We have FAR more trips to the mound, offensive conferences, team meetings in front of the dugout at the end of a half-inning, etc., in softball than they do in baseball. Why? And I can guarantee Kruk would have been questioning the constant intentional walks in the supers, rather the simpleton analysis of "She's got 15 home runs, I agree with walking her."
The announcing has gotten much better in the last 5 years, but we are still in the mode of "infectious personality!" for players and almost totally refusing to question the decisions of coaches. Walton makes around $400,000, Gasso is around $500,000. They can be questioned. If an analyst adopts the attitude of "I can't question Tim Walton or Patty Gasso since they know more about the game than I do," then don't take the job.
I watch a ton of MLB and also MLB Network in the studio at night. I am used to strong analysis and non-fawning coverage. I guess my expectations for our game are too high.