JABO: Pitch Framing

Four different parties have a hand in determining whether a pitch is called a ball or a strike: the batter, the pitcher, the catcher and the umpire. Where past efforts to quantify the value of pitch-framing have awarded all credit to the catcher, the BIS team found that, indeed, the catcher is the most influential party, but the second-most important variable in the ball/strike equation is not the pitcher or the batter. It's the home-plate umpire.

Now, 1.5 wins -- or 15 runs, roughly -- is a lot! But the observed effects have been more like THIRTY runs for the best pitch-framers ... which, if true, would essentially rewrite the rules on player valuation, because suddenly a good pitch-framer who can also hit is automatically the best player in the league. If the league doesn't include Mike Trout, anyway.

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/baseball-joe/blog/not-so-fast-matthew-lucroy-032515

This is pretty much where I have been. It's a useful skill and does have value but not 30 runs worth of value.

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/baseball-joe/blog/not-so-fast-matthew-lucroy-032515

This is pretty much where I have been. It's a useful skill and does have value but not 30 runs worth of value.

From 2008-2013 the top framers in runs saved are (BP):

Brian McCann 127

Jose Molina 116

Jonathan Lucroy 94

Russell Martin 91

Ryan Hanigan 74

David Ross 65

Yadier Molina 62

Miguel Montero 62

Chris Stewart 43

Buster Posey 41

The only guys that are anywhere close to averaging +30 runs a year are Lucroy and J. Molina who are probably closer to 25 and are/were both considered otherwise to be a well below average defensive catchers with J. Molina being a very poor hitter and platoon player who was cut despite still possessing those skills.

As far as the umpires go, I would think that there is some balancing out on this as teams don't see the same home plate umpires all the time. I suppose the savvy catchers do take advantage of the weak umpires though.

It also seams clear that teams are putting more and more emphasis on this. Between that and the umpires being more cognizant about it, I suppose some of the wider separations of the past will begin to narrow.

Do you give UZR and DRS numbers full weight? Each and every season?

From 2008-2013 the top framers in runs saved are (BP):

Brian McCann 127

Jose Molina 116

Jonathan Lucroy 94

Russell Martin 91

Ryan Hanigan 74

David Ross 65

Yadier Molina 62

Miguel Montero 62

Chris Stewart 43

Buster Posey 41

The only guys that are anywhere close to averaging +30 runs a year are Lucroy and J. Molina who are probably closer to 25 and are/were both considered otherwise to be a well below average catchers and. J; Molina being a very poor hitter and platoon player As far as the umpires go, I would think that there is some balancing out on this as teams don't see the same home plate umpires all the time. I suppose the savvy catchers do take advantage of the weak umpires though.

It also seams clear that teams are putting more and more emphasis on this. Between that and the umpires being more cognizant about it, I suppose some of the wider separations of the past will begin to narrow.

Do you give UZR and DRS numbers full weight?

There are not as many floating factors in UZR and DRS. You see the direction and speed the ball is traveling and if the fielder gets to it.

Do we not know, for a fact, that the area encompassing the called strikezone grows on a 3-0 count? Do we not know it shrinks on a 0-2 count? Do we not know that the called strike zone varies with the pitcher? Have we not observed the strike zone growing dramatically in afternoon away games? The current version of framing stats don't account for a host of other factors.

There are not as many floating factors in UZR and DRS. You see the direction and speed the ball is traveling and if the fielder gets to it.

Do we not know, for a fact, that the area encompassing the called strikezone grows on a 3-0 count? Do we not know it shrinks on a 0-2 count? Do we not know that the called strike zone varies with the pitcher? Have we not observed the strike zone growing dramatically in afternoon away games? The current version of framing stats don't account for a host of other factors.

Sounds like some of the "generally poor" arguments about defensive metrics relating to field conditions, weather, sun, rain, bad bounces, Park adjustments/factors, Umpire Scoring (counts in UZR), Defensive misplays (counts in DRS), inability to accurately measure a batted ball etc. etc. I would argue the overall quantity of events, reams of data and associated variables relating to pitch framing provide a much more stable data set. Are they perfect? No. Reasonably good. Yep.

The premise/representation that "if catchers are providing 30 runs above average pitch framing (which isn't true) then everybody would be doing it" is simply false.

Sounds like some of the "generally poor" arguments about defensive metrics relating to field conditions, weather, sun, rain, bad bounces, Park adjustments/factors, Umpire Scoring (counts in UZR), Defensive misplays (counts in DRS), inability to accurately measure a batted ball etc. etc. I would argue the overall quantity of events, reams of data and associated variables relating to pitch framing provide a much more stable data set. Are they perfect? No. Reasonably good. Yep.

The premise/representation that "if catchers are providing 30 runs above average pitch framing (which isn't true) then everybody would be doing it" is simply false.

Who posited that? I don't see folks not accepting that it is a skill and that certain catchers are better at it then others.

I just don't agree that every time a ball is called a strike you credit the catcher.

Do you trust the current* methodology?

*By current I mean 2014, I have seen some interesting stuff about attempting to quantify more factors for this upcoming season.

Who posited that?

It was a quote in your OP and (I assumed from the article) and that you emphasized:

But the observed effects have been more like THIRTY runs for the best pitch-framers ... which, if true, would essentially rewrite the rules on player valuation, because suddenly a good pitch-framer who can also hit is automatically the best player in the league. If the league doesn't include Mike Trout, anyway.

This is pretty much where I have been. It's a useful skill and does have value but not 30 runs worth of value.

I just don't agree that every time a ball is called a strike you credit the catcher.

The article you provided said they do adjust for pitchers (I knew this and I assume good sources do this). The question in the article was about umpires influence, which I don't see as a big factor considering how they are rotated. Do certain catchers leverage certain umpires? I'm sure they do.

Do you trust the current methodology?

In general, yes. Do I trust every years worth of data as accurate? No. Could it be further refined.? Yes. Accurate enough with the aggregate data we have? Yes.

It was a quote in your OP and (I assumed from the article) and that you emphasized:

The article you provided said they do adjust for pitchers (I knew this and I assume good sources do this). The question in the article was about umpires influence, which I don't see as a big facto considering how they are rotated. Do certain catcher leverage certain umpires? I'm sure they do.

In general, yes. Do I trust every years worth of data as accurate? No. Could it be further erfined, Eys. Accurate enough with the aggregate data we have? Yes.

They are questioning if anyone is worth 30 runs. It is a matter of degree. Not sure where this "everyone would be doing it" is coming from? No where do they say that anyone can be +30 runs good.

They are questioning if anyone is worth 30 runs. It is a matter of degree. Not sure where this "everyone would be doing it" is coming from? No where do they say that anyone can be +30 runs good.

When you go on about being "unbelievable", putting THIRTY in caps and a "good pitch framing catcher being as valuable as Mike Trout" that's absoloutely what the narrative is. Besides the rhetoric, the entire premise is false considering re-peatability and years of aggregate data.

When you go out about being "unbelievable", putting THIRTY in caps and a "good pitch framing catcher being as valuable as Mike Trout" that's absoloutely what the narrative is. Besides the rhetoric, the entire premise is false considering re-peatability and years of aggregate data.

I disagree with your take on the narrative.

At no point do they deny it is a skill and at no point do they assert that it is an easily mastered skill.

I do think that if you run the numbers and a result that strains credibility shows up you should go check your methodology.

I disagree with your take on the narrative.

At no point do they deny it is a skill and at no point do they assert that it is an easily mastered skill.

I do think that if you run the numbers and a result that strains credibility shows up you should go check your methodology.

Well, we disagree.

It's amazing to me that certain catchers can change pitchers/staffs and teams and still retain proficiency at this while others don't. With many of them you can (arguably) see the skill in action. That said, I would always want to see data with the pitchers skill accounted for (and I'm pretty sure that data is out there in some of the forms).

I've seen the data in various forms and don't have much of an issue with it. In reality the aggregate data over numerous years (data that I already showed you) for the top catchers is much closer to 15 than the 30 over-emphasized in the article. I say good on the DRS guys and bad on Cameron for incorporating it in the metrics.

Despite any deficiencies with the data, the fact that more and more teams are looking at the data, increasingly emphasizing it, and now paying (at least more) for it speaks volumes to its credibility.

Feel free to have the last word.

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/baseball-joe/blog/not-so-fast-matthew-lucroy-032515

This is pretty much where I have been. It's a useful skill and does have value but not 30 runs worth of value.

:agree:

Pitch framing is a skill, and is by no means new. I did it in high school... and that wasn't exactly yesterday. :laughlol: The difficult thing to master is catching the ball in the very tip of the webbing so that by all appearances the pitch hit the target on the corner of the plate. It is not as much about bringing it back, as the motion of pulling it back in the zone is hard to conceal. Naturally, catching the ball in the very end of the webbing is going to lead to more passed balls. That is the trade-off.

It is also by no means new for people to notice that one pitcher and/or team seems to be getting more borderline strike calls than the other team in a game. This is as old as the game itself, and happens nearly everyday on ball fields across the country. It is certainly not always because of the catcher's pitch-framing skills. Does anyone for a second believe that Maddux and Glavine got all those strike calls on pitches four inches off the outside corner because Javy Lopez and Eddie Perez were such excellent pitch-framers? Really?

I think sometimes we go overboard in trying to quantify statistically everything that happens in the game - and this is certainly an example of it. There is value in a catcher who is adept at framing, but it is simply not to the level that these numbers indicate. As Mr. Corn has said here, when the numbers indicate a plus value on the order of 30 runs, the valuation methodology needs to be checked.

I think the most important aspect of framing is putting the glove in a position so that the

Umpire has the best view. Further, if you catch the ball in the center of the body it also gives

the umpire a much better presentation. I think that pitch framing may be over valued on a

Statistical basis, however, IMO it has been undervalued by fans for a long time. Also, I think

that is logical to believe that the umpires are a huge factor in the equation. Like others have

Stated, these players know what strike zone these umps are working off of. They are going to

get as many borderline strikes as they can by framing the pitches properly.