Umpire Scorecard Thread

[spleen1015]

https://umpscorecards.com/teams/

Looking at the Ump Scorecards website, it looks like the umpires have cost the O's 6.69 runs so far this year. That's 3rd worst behind the A's and White Sox.

So, we're playing against the other team AND the umpires! 

The Indians are the best at +13.41 followed by the MFY(+10.84) and Mets(+8.61).

[dystopia]

4 minutes ago, spleen1015 said:

https://umpscorecards.com/teams/

Looking at the Ump Scorecards website, it looks like the umpires have cost the O's 6.69 runs so far this year. That's 3rd worst behind the A's and White Sox.

So, we're playing against the other team AND the umpires! 

The Indians are the best at +13.41 followed by the MFY(+10.84) and Mets(+8.61).

Nobody should be shocked. Wonder what the MFY’s is. 

[Frobby]

Not a surprise, +0.99 runs in favor of the Blue Jays last night, mostly on balls that were called strikes.  
 

 

[Three Run Homer]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Not a surprise, +0.99 runs in favor of the Blue Jays last night, mostly on balls that were called strikes.  
 

 

I knew there was a reason I was yelling at my TV screen last night.  

[Sports Guy]

 

[dystopia]

No surprise Yankees are 2nd on most favorable. 

 

[dystopia]

Can't wait to see last night's.

[Malike]

Expected accuracy is different for each umpire apparently. Diaz has an expected accuracy of 91%? He shouldn't be calling games.

Edited May 21 by Malike

[Aristotelian]

5 minutes ago, Malike said:

 

 

Something with their "expected" accuracy metric is severely broken if it thinks Diaz was better than expected. 

Also I don't know how the Gorman pitch could be more impactful than the missed third strike that turned into a three run homer.

[Malike]

5 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

 

Something with their "expected" accuracy metric is severely broken if it thinks Diaz was better than expected. 

Also I don't know how the Gorman pitch could be more impactful than the missed third strike that turned into a three run homer.

Well, his xAcc was 91% which seems low. Lance Barksdale had an xAcc of 94%. I don't understand why there are differences other than knowing that Diaz is pure trash at his job and the bar is lower for him.

[dystopia]

We’ve been completely f****d this year by umpiring because we’re the biggest competition to the MFYs this year. 

[24fps]

23 minutes ago, Malike said:

Expected accuracy is different for each umpire apparently. Diaz has an expected accuracy of 91%? He shouldn't be calling games.

The best umpire so far this year has been wrong over 5% of the time, the worst close to 10%.  I suspect historical averages are similar  There is simply no persuasive argument to not institute technological assistance to calling balls and strikes unless you can clearly demonstrate that the outcome would be worse.

[Malike]

9 minutes ago, 24fps said:

The best umpire so far this year has been wrong over 5% of the time, the worst close to 10%.  I suspect historical averages are similar  There is simply no persuasive argument to not institute technological assistance to calling balls and strikes unless you can clearly demonstrate that the outcome would be worse.

It just doesn't make sense when they have the technology to improve it, to not improve it. 

[AdamK]

34 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

 

Something with their "expected" accuracy metric is severely broken if it thinks Diaz was better than expected. 

Also I don't know how the Gorman pitch could be more impactful than the missed third strike that turned into a three run homer.

FWIW, Kremer didn't know it was blown (according to post-game interview). Either that or he's a level 20 diplomat.

[Mooreisbetter27]

I just don't see any justifiable reason why this isn't implemented.  I don't see why the umpire union would have an issue with it and it would make sure the calls are right.  We're already testing it in the minors.  Just bite the bullet and do it already.  Umpires don't lose jobs because they're still back there calling the plays.  The only ones who get mad about it is the old tradionalist's that consistently use the "human element" argument.  Which to me, is a crock.  So frustrating to watch constant mistakes when they easily can be rectified.