Not to take anything away from their effort, but I think there's much more about it than just good content and dicussion (or much less, depending on where you stand).

I'd put personalities aside.

The thing about the discussion is, they can be right, they can be wrong, who can know? If somebody outside the teams knows, how can they prove it? If the players voice out themselves, they risk losing their edges in competition. (Quoting JW:Seems like all casters/personalities know more about whats going on within the teams than the actual teams themself)

For example: Team A playing CT Dust2 has a god-like AWPer. He usually loves staying at long A looking at cat. Team B try to base their strat based on that assumption. Now suppose I blame the in-game leader of team A because he's switched up strat, takes up the AWP and point it up mid to prevent cat being taken. Is it extremely insightful of me, or extremely short-sighted? Next level: You can argue that, would it be even better if the star awper changes to mid himself? I suppose that's a conversation they have ALREADY HAD with each other, then decided between themselves? How can I trust two strangers who haven't proved anything IN the game?

Richard and Thorin try to hard to "analyze" the game. Even the analysts at events can only analyze each match, each round, each action. (Which kinda reminds me, why does nobody call them analysts? Looking at the announcements, the term "expert" is more commonly used instead of "analyst" like everybody else. Damn Ctrl-C Ctrl-V broken!)

It's their job to create content rather than be a player and play the game, so the video's done what it is supposed to do: create content. But to say that the content is good is really objective.

I personally find these kinds of videos more useful: Renegades Pistol Strategy Breakdown on Train. I don't even need to verify anything to actually enjoy the analysis. I don't even need to know the video owner to trust the video.