Umpire Scorecard Thread

[ShoelesJoe]

11 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Why would the Umpire Scorecard guy mess with their methodology just to make it look like the O's aren't getting screwed?

Use some common sense folks.

It might be accurate, it might not be, but we have no reason to think it's biased against the O's.

As I said earlier in this thread, the Umpire Scorecard calculations treat every missed call as if they happen in a vacuum rather than how they actually impact the game going forward. This calls into question their "Overall Favor" judgement. A two out 0-2 pitch in the strike zone that's mistakenly called a ball holds the same value whether that batter strikes out on the next pitch to end the inning or hits a grand slam to win the game. Their methodology is seriously flawed in this respect. 

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, ShoelesJoe said:

As I said earlier in this thread, the Umpire Scorecard calculations treat every missed call as if they happen in a vacuum rather than how they actually impact the game going forward. This calls into question their "Overall Favor" judgement. A two out 0-2 pitch in the strike zone that's mistakenly called a ball holds the same value whether that batter strikes out on the next pitch to end the inning or hits a grand slam to win the game. Their methodology is seriously flawed in this respect. 

Which is fine, but folks here are acting as if the producer is somehow biased against the O's, which is ridiculous.

To be honest, what you are asking for is way too much work for what is I believe one person to do.

I'm just thankful they make this resource available to us.

[SteveA]

34 minutes ago, ShoelesJoe said:

As I said earlier in this thread, the Umpire Scorecard calculations treat every missed call as if they happen in a vacuum rather than how they actually impact the game going forward. This calls into question their "Overall Favor" judgement. A two out 0-2 pitch in the strike zone that's mistakenly called a ball holds the same value whether that batter strikes out on the next pitch to end the inning or hits a grand slam to win the game. Their methodology is seriously flawed in this respect. 

I don't consider that flawed.   The main thing they are trying to measure is the ump's ability.   How many calls he gets right, how many he gets wrong.   That is the PURPOSE of the page.    And what happens after an ump's bad call has nothing to do with his ability.

Now they do provide the overall favor judgement based on calls for/against teams.   That is additional information, and it could be useful.   And I don't think it is completely context independent either.   It doesn't try to take into account what happened after because that is next to impossible.   But I do think* it weighs the situational impact of a call.   A 3-2 ball that is called a strike with the bases loaded and two outs DOES count more in that judgement than a 1-0 strike called a ball with the bases empty and no one out.   So it does factor in the relative importance of the game situation, it just doesn't go and try to reconstruct the inning with the "right call" to determine the overall effect, which is nearly impossible to do anyway.   [*Am I right in my perception that it does weigh the situation in that judgement?   I don't have time to go researching it today while I am at work].

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, SteveA said:

I don't consider that flawed.   The main thing they are trying to measure is the ump's ability.   How many calls he gets right, how many he gets wrong.   That is the PURPOSE of the page.    And what happens after an ump's bad call has nothing to do with his ability.

Now they do provide the overall favor judgement based on calls for/against teams.   That is additional information, and it could be useful.   And I don't think it is completely context independent either.   It doesn't try to take into account what happened after because that is next to impossible.   But I do think* it weighs the situational impact of a call.   A 3-2 ball that is called a strike with the bases loaded and two outs DOES count more in that judgement than a 1-0 strike called a ball with the bases empty and no one out.   So it does factor in the relative importance of the game situation, it just doesn't go and try to reconstruct the inning with the "right call" to determine the overall effect, which is nearly impossible to do anyway.   [*Am I right in my perception that it does weigh the situation in that judgement?   I don't have time to go researching it today while I am at work].

It tracks the difference in run expectancy.  Each pitch is tracked as a separate incident.

[SteveA]

12 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

It tracks the difference in run expectancy.  Each pitch is tracked as a separate incident.

Right.   And a 3-2 pitch with the bases loaded called the wrong way has a much bigger effect on run expectancy than a 1-0 pitch with the bases empty and no one out being called wrong, correct?

So it does take some context into account, just not nearly as much as some in this thread would like.    And I think it is a good stat in that respect, so I disagree with the concept that it is flawed.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, SteveA said:

Right.   And a 3-2 pitch with the bases loaded called the wrong way has a much bigger effect on run expectancy than a 1-0 pitch with the bases empty and no one out being called wrong, correct?

So it does take some context into account, just not nearly as much as some in this thread would like.    And I think it is a good stat in that respect, so I disagree with the concept that it is flawed.

There’s no way to do what ShoelessJoe would like to do.   A batter has a 1-1 count and a strike is called a ball, making the count 2-1 instead of 1-2.   Then the batter homers on the next pitch.  Would be have homered if the count was 1-2?   Would the pitcher have thrown the same pitch?   Who knows?  You literally don’t know the impact that call had.  

[Number5]

Someone mentioned on here earlier that one factor that isn't taken into account is the fact that hitters and pitchers adjust to an umpire's erroneous zone  If an umpire calls 2 or 3 outside pitches strikes early on, hitters feel they have to swing at the outside pitches for the rest of the game, or at a minimum the rest of that particular plate appearance.  This scorecard only reports pitches that are not swung at.  The umpire's impact on the game can actually be quite a bit more than the scorecard indicates, but there really isn't any way to quantify that factor.

[ShoelesJoe]

There is no practical reason that MLB cannot implement this system at the big league level. 
 

 

 

[ShoelesJoe]

16 minutes ago, Frobby said:

There’s no way to do what ShoelessJoe would like to do.   

I agree. But my point is that so long as the true impact of a bad call can’t be taken into account their “Overall Favor” calculation is meaningless. 

[Frobby]

32 minutes ago, ShoelesJoe said:

I agree. But my point is that so long as the true impact of a bad call can’t be taken into account their “Overall Favor” calculation is meaningless. 

I don’t think it’s meaningless.  It just doesn’t measure what you’d like to measure.  

[zweem]

1 hour ago, ShoelesJoe said:

I agree. But my point is that so long as the true impact of a bad call can’t be taken into account their “Overall Favor” calculation is meaningless. 

this site gives the at bat outcome. From the other night showing the 13-3 met advantage.

[ShoelesJoe]

56 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I don’t think it’s meaningless.  It just doesn’t measure what you’d like to measure.  

It doesn't measure what it says it measures. 

[Emory Eagle]

The umpiring was terrible in this series.  And boy does Adley need to be a better catcher - he’s not framing, not throwing out baserunners… maybe it’s health related.

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, ShoelesJoe said:

It doesn't measure what it says it measures. 

Yes it does.  You’re just more interested in the 20/20 hindsight version of the impact rather than the forward-looking version of the expected impact.  

[Frobby]

Speaking of impactful calls, how about the 8th inning ball 4 call on Urias today with Cowser attempting to steal.  It’s an obvious strike, Cowser is thrown out, and then the ump calls the pitch ball 4 so the tag on Cowser is inconsequential.  Runners on 1st and 2nd, nobody out instead of nobody on and 2 out.  

So, is it better to judge the impact of that call by what actually happened, or by its potential impact?   The ump doesn’t control what happens next, so I’d say the latter.  

The expected number of runs with runners on 1st and 2nd and nobody out is 1.373.   The expectancy nobody on and 2 out is 0.095.  So, that call favored the Orioles by 1.278 runs, regardless of what happened next.