Do You Support A Technology-Assisted Strike Zone?

[DrungoHazewood]

Please explain how you are going to hold umps more accountable.

After each game that the ump fails to call 90% of strikes strikes he's demoted to the minors. Which results in 100% turnover among MLB umpires each month.

[El Gordo]

After each game that the ump fails to call 90% of strikes strikes he's demoted to the minors. Which results in 100% turnover among MLB umpires each month.

They monitor them now. We just don't know what kinds of measures are taken against poor performance. It seems to me to require a slight adjustment of the current system, not a draconian over haul that your penchant for hyperbole would suggest. I wonder what the actual % of consistency for plate umopires is. My guess it is pretty high in comparison with anecdotal evidence.

[Anonsnides]

I think the umpires should just do a better job. It is up to the league to tell the umpires "this is the strike zone. If you cannot call it like it is then youre fired." Whether that means having someone in the booth, then fine.

To the people saying that other sports have done it, so we should too; Baseball isn't LIKE other sports.

[LookinUp]

Baseball needs umpires, but they don't need them to be a critical, often determining, part of the game. I think back to Livan Hernandez's gem of a start for the Marlins a decade ago. He was getting calls 8" off the plate. No wonder he struck out 18 (or whatever it was).

What we accept as "part of the game" is nothing more than an inconsistent, and potentially biased, skew that hurts true competitive sport. Today's strike zone is silly beyond belief. Many pitches that should be strikes (like the one R.A. Dickey threw against Davis to close the game last night) are almost never called strikes. Alternatively, many pitches that aren't real strikes are very frequently called.

If a new system suffered from technical readiness, that's one thing. OTOH, if the new system's flaws were limited to its affect on offense in general, that could easily be accommodated by changing the rules (e.g., wider plate, moving the zone up or down). MLB could do this easily and add a lot of credibility, IMO.

[DrungoHazewood]

They monitor them now. We just don't know what kinds of measures are taken against poor performance. It seems to me to require a slight adjustment of the current system, not a draconian over haul that your penchant for hyperbole would suggest. I wonder what the actual % of consistency for plate umopires is. My guess it is pretty high in comparison with anecdotal evidence.

I think the Pitch F/x data suggests that 10-15% of pitches are called incorrectly, or around 30 pitches a game.

[DrungoHazewood]

I think the umpires should just do a better job. It is up to the league to tell the umpires "this is the strike zone. If you cannot call it like it is then youre fired." Whether that means having someone in the booth, then fine.

To the people saying that other sports have done it, so we should too; Baseball isn't LIKE other sports.

And that's not always a good thing. Baseball often refuses to make common sense changes that obviously worked other places because, hey, we're baseball and we haven't changed a major rule since the Grover Cleveland administration.

[Can_of_corn]

I think the umpires should just do a better job. It is up to the league to tell the umpires "this is the strike zone. If you cannot call it like it is then youre fired." Whether that means having someone in the booth, then fine.

To the people saying that other sports have done it, so we should too; Baseball isn't LIKE other sports.

Then you have the ump go "Take it up with my union.".

The Ump's union isn't going to allow the firing of members because of missed ball/strike calls.

[crissfan172]

No...because there are countless times when I look at MLB's Gameday, and I see the pitches that they think are strikes. I really just want better umps that actually get disciplined when they screw up.

I am in favor of computer assistance for fair and foul calls like in tennis. Trying to call fair or foul on balls over the bag is nearly impossible for umpires, so don't force them to make that call.

[Jagwar]

Or at least have the umpires pretend that they are being electrically shocked to appease angry fans.

Then, we'll find out just how humane baseball fans at-large are. :scratchchinhmm:

http://psychology.about.com/od/historyofpsychology/a/milgram.htm

Rep to you for the Milgram Experiment reference.

I'm pretty sure that people would be much more likely to press that button simply because it shocks an umpire.

[russ snyder]

I voted no. Some umps are better at balls and strikes than others. The umps with the better grades should be given more assignments behind the plate. Instead of once every four days, perhaps you give them the assignment twice within the same time period. If the best players are on the field, they should put the umps in the same position.

[DrungoHazewood]

I voted no. Some umps are better at balls and strikes than others. The umps with the better grades should be given more assignments behind the plate. Instead of once every four days, perhaps you give them the assignment twice within the same time period. If the best players are on the field, they should put the umps in the same position.

I would assume that being the home plate ump was by far the most physically and mentally demanding spot, so you'd have to couple your reassignment plan with a tiered pay structure. Otherwise they'd hate it. If there was no extra pay for much more/harder work I'd just call everything within 3' of the plate a strike and I'd be working third base for the rest of my life.

[russ snyder]

I would assume that being the home plate ump was by far the most physically and mentally demanding spot, so you'd have to couple your reassignment plan with a tiered pay structure. Otherwise they'd hate it. If there was no extra pay for much more/harder work I'd just call everything within 3' of the plate a strike and I'd be working third base for the rest of my life.

Absolutely. Thanks for helping me think it through. Along with the extra pay for the extra work, there would be a prestige element to being the "preferred" home plate ump. Also, because they are continually evaluated, there is always competition for the spot.

[Palmoripken]

Honestly no. Call me a traditionalist but part of me is intrigued and likes the fact that umps have different zones and that the pitcher has to adapt to that ump's zone. I do want better umping of course but replacing the ump calling balls and strikes with a machine sounds tacky to me.

[Can_of_corn]

Honestly no. Call me a traditionalist but part of me is intrigued and likes the fact that umps have different zones and that the pitcher has to adapt to that ump's zone. I do want better umping of course but replacing the ump calling balls and strikes with a machine sounds tacky to me.

It isn't as if you would have Robby back there waving his arms going "Strike three Will Robinson!". There would be an Ump behind the plate, who would have all the rest of the duties he has now. He would just be equipped with an earpiece that would tell him ball or strike, which he would then relay.

[El Gordo]

It isn't as if you would have Robby back there waving his arms going "Strike three Will Robinson!". There would be an Ump behind the plate, who would have all the rest of the duties he has now. He would just be equipped with an earpiece that would tell him ball or strike, which he would then relay.

Why bother with the ear piece, just post the count prominently on the score board, perhaps with a Hal voice over the loud speakers.