Last week I wondered why fans seem to hate certain commentators. At TNR, Jason Zengerle wrote this piece examining basketball commentary and fan psychology.

Zengerle says that fans love relentlessly positive cheerleaders like Dick Vitale, but they hate honest and critical analysts like Billy Packer.

As an descriptive matter, I'm not sure that's true. Plenty of people hate Vitale. Perceptions of bias dog him (hence the nickname Duke-y V), and his shtick has worn out. He has also hurt his credibility by selling out and making a barrage of annoying commercials, the embarrasing grandpa-ogling-tits Hooters ads worst among them.

And look at the women's game. Nancy Lieberman and Ann Meyers are cheerleaders, far more likely to play the role of booster than that of critic, yet they are still widely disliked by fans.

Zengerle's descriptive point -- that fans love cheerleaders and hate critics -- is debateable. His more important normative point, however, is unassailable.

When Packer points out a questionable coaching decision or comments on a player's lack of hustle, he'll at least be bringing some much-needed perspective to an event that all too often is more about hype than substance. And in the boosterish world of sports commentary, even just a little critical thinking is a rare and refreshing thing.