CAMELOT FANTASIES

Glad to advise Lady TT.
Commentators are different like people are different. Some good , some average, some relatively poor (though they shouldn't be).
Now I'll make up some excuses for them.

1. During a match there isn't always time to explain things.

2. They don't realize the audience level of understanding and experience varies so they kind of assume the watcher is rather dumb, and will just accept whatever they say, or perhaps very knowledgeable and not care much what they say.  So the middle ground watcher is often left begging for more information, or rather the why's and hows behind their sometimes brash declarations.

3. They are often paid to glorify the top players and make them look like supermen or the most courageous athletes on the planet.  So if they say how much the player suffers to play his style of game, then when he succeeds in spite of that, it makes him look like a Spartan.  IF they say how beautiful and effortless the player is to watch, it makes him look like a genius.  If they say how great the player moves on the court returning everything hit to him, it makes him look like Usain Bolt combined with a force field like a wall.  Now, no doubt some of these things are true to an extent, like a myth or legend is true.  But there is a lot of hyperbole.

4. They are paid to keep the viewers entertained and watching, even if it is a dull or never in doubt match.  Sometimes they will say outrageous things, infuriating some viewers, similar to trolls on an internet forum.

And more... 

The best commentators don't say too much, but commentate when a particular strategy is being used, or might be used, and explain why it might have a better chance or less chance of working against a particular opponent.  They inform the watcher, but do it in such a way that someone new to the sport can understand, but someone experienced can still appreciate.

As for Wawrinka, yes, he generally stands pretty far back, especially on the slowest courts, because he also takes big swings at the ball, and needs the time.  He's generally not as comfortable on faster courts, and low bouncing where he needs to take the ball earlier.  Yes, he is one of the strongest players on the tour, especially in the legs and torso.  He gets tremendous power from the torque of his body as he loads up turning, and then releases.  He can produce a better shot than Federer, for example, on the high backhand, even with one hand, because of that strength.

The reasons for his inconsistency may partially be physical, and quite possibly mental.  He has said that he just doesn't feel like the kind of player who can show up every week and give it 100%.  But recently he says that in any one tournament, he knows he can beat any player if he plays his best tennis, which is a big change from how he used to think before hiring Magnus Norman and beating the likes of Djokovic and Nadal in Australia.  So it appears to me like he saves his best effort for the most important tournaments. 

He has made enough money now that he can afford to do this.  He's achieved more than he thought he would.  He's fulfilled his biggest dreams of winning a major and winning Davis Cup.  So I believe he believes that everything else is gravy, so he'll enjoy life between the slams, and then put out the biggest effort in the slams and a couple of other tournaments where he knows he can do well.  Not everyone is made the same, not everyone is committed to wanting to win everything in sight at the cost of other things, and I respect his choice.

Anyway, again, I'll wait for General Hercules explain more why Rafa's game takes such a high degree of fitness, and when it isn't there, his game and confidence suffers.  Time and time again throughout tennis history, players who played the topspin game have burned out faster than others for a reason, and often need long breaks from the game or retire early.

Respectfully,
masterclass