Jump to content

MLB umpiring thread


shadow_operative
 Share

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, T-shirt Sip said:

The last one was the closest one and the batter lost his mind. I would have wanted to see his reaction if he was batting on the 2nd video. That one was waaaayyy inside. 

 

20 minutes ago, Hank Chinaski said:

I think Schwarber was speaking/demonstrating  on behalf of everybody.

Yeah Schwarber wasn't going off on him just because of that one call - he was more or less telling him you've sucked all game from both sides of the plate and for both teams. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Angel Hernandez needs his own thread but the on-screen graphics don't help.

image.png.5c7ec9a566c62743bbd991ab7c272abc.png

The top of that box isn't even close to the top of the actual strike zone. Of course the whole thing looks shifted down.

image.png.0c7dd194127524d091694e1345743e38.png

I'll buy it's high but it's not throw a fit high.

image.png.8e4a6d0dc4c27a16b247828ca7b5ebd5.png

That box is top of pants to top of shoulders. The blue midline is just that, a midline. That ball is in the rulebook strike zone at that point. The only question is my timing/depth perception on when it was over the plate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Yeah, Angel Hernandez needs his own thread but the on-screen graphics don't help.

image.png.5c7ec9a566c62743bbd991ab7c272abc.png

The top of that box isn't even close to the top of the actual strike zone. Of course the whole thing looks shifted down.

image.png.0c7dd194127524d091694e1345743e38.png

I'll buy it's high but it's not throw a fit high.

image.png.8e4a6d0dc4c27a16b247828ca7b5ebd5.png

That box is top of pants to top of shoulders. The blue midline is just that, a midline. That ball is in the rulebook strike zone at that point. The only question is my timing/depth perception on when it was over the plate.

How can you possibly be one of the best posters on this site, yet be the shittiest non-Helobius poster in the baseball forum?

If that ball is at the midline of the top of the strike zone, why is the catcher trying to pull it down when he catches it instead of framing it there?  Who knows the MLB strike zone better, JT Realmuto, with nearly 800 games behind the plate, or you?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a love/hate relationship with the K Zone. It really helps illustrate both the pitcher and hitter’s approach and shine a light on bad pitches and terrible swings/takes in addition to horrible calls. But the whining about missed calls an inch or two off the “strike zone” drives me crazy. First off, calling balls/stokes must be very difficult with the speed and movement of the ball. And as mentioned above, that box on tv is 2d while the strike zone isn’t thus is very deceiving. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

How can you possibly be one of the best posters on this site, yet be the shittiest non-Helobius poster in the baseball forum?

If that ball is at the midline of the top of the strike zone, why is the catcher trying to pull it down when he catches it instead of framing it there?  Who knows the MLB strike zone better, JT Realmuto, with nearly 800 games behind the plate, or you?

I mean if you actually thought about it you'd figure it out. JT Realmuto knows the called strike zone and that's what he's framing to. You're smart enough to know that if you weren't so busy trying to jump on every one of my posts you see. Once again you're not disputing any of the actual facts or evidence. That box is showing you the top of the rulebook strike zone for Narváez.

Your question is like asking why catchers bothered to frame pitches 2-3 inches further outside for left-handed batters during the heyday of the shifted left-handed strike zone.

Besides, the point is the shitty ass K zone graphic. The pitch to Narváez was probably a rulebook strike but it certainly wasn't super high. Look at this shit they put up on the screen sometimes:

image.png.6a68d7725f3b59a897b51075b907a9e8.png

Yeah, Hernández fucked that call up 5 inches inside, but that doesn't change the point about the graphic.

Edited by Huckleberry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I know some don’t like it usually an ump might be consistently “wrong” during a game in one or two spots. “He seems to be giving them a ball off the plate low and away tonight.” or “He really likes those high ones tonight.” While not the most ideal pretty much the way baseball deals with this and has always dealt with that at all levels is “ok we see his zone, you know how he’s calling them…adjust”

Angel is just so spastically all over the god damn place there isn’t anything you can adjust to.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^ exactly that. he was all over the place tonight, calling pitches that were way out of the zone strikes, and then suddenly in the bottom of the 8th Devin Williams starts off throwing five straight pitches that are called balls despite the fact that four of them were borderline on espn's k zone. even the announcers said, "and suddenly the strike zone has tightened up." fast forward to schwarber's AB and the zone has suddenly expanded again. fuck Angel Hernandez for real, he's legitimately bad for the sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Yeah, Angel Hernandez needs his own thread but the on-screen graphics don't help.

image.png.5c7ec9a566c62743bbd991ab7c272abc.png

The top of that box isn't even close to the top of the actual strike zone. Of course the whole thing looks shifted down.

image.png.0c7dd194127524d091694e1345743e38.png

I'll buy it's high but it's not throw a fit high.

image.png.8e4a6d0dc4c27a16b247828ca7b5ebd5.png

That box is top of pants to top of shoulders. The blue midline is just that, a midline. That ball is in the rulebook strike zone at that point. The only question is my timing/depth perception on when it was over the plate.

The rule book strike zone hasn’t been a thing since the 1950’s.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

I mean if you actually thought about it you'd figure it out. JT Realmuto knows the called strike zone and that's what he's framing to. You're smart enough to know that if you weren't so busy trying to jump on every one of my posts you see. Once again you're not disputing any of the actual facts or evidence. That box is showing you the top of the rulebook strike zone for Narváez.

Your question is like asking why catchers bothered to frame pitches 2-3 inches further outside for left-handed batters during the heyday of the shifted left-handed strike zone.

Besides, the point is the shitty ass K zone graphic. The pitch to Narváez was probably a rulebook strike but it certainly wasn't super high. Look at this shit they put up on the screen sometimes:

image.png.6a68d7725f3b59a897b51075b907a9e8.png

Yeah, Hernández fucked that call up 5 inches inside, but that doesn't change the point about the graphic.

That is pretty much what I know to be what a vertical mlb strike zone is at this time. Bottom of knees to belt/belly button.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

The rule book strike zone hasn’t been a thing since the 1950’s.

Pretty much this.

And umps are allowed to have their own strike zone (for some reason).  It's perfectly acceptable for an ump to give the pitcher an inch or two off the edge of the plate, but not the top line of the zone (for some reason).  And by all accounts, the pitchers, hitters, and managers are okay with this as long as the zone is consistent.

The problem with Angel Hernandez is that you can throw the exact same pitch four times in a row and get a 2-2 count.  He's like a Magic 8 Ball back there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, T-shirt Sip said:

The last one was the closest one and the batter lost his mind. I would have wanted to see his reaction if he was batting on the 2nd video. That one was waaaayyy inside. 

It is because what the first post doesn't show you is this already happened to Schwarber once in the game, so this was the 2nd time he got rang up on something out of the zone by dildo.  He almost lost his shit earlier, but kept it together. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, TexArcher said:

And umps are allowed to have their own strike zone (for some reason).  It's perfectly acceptable for an ump to give the pitcher an inch or two off the edge of the plate, but not the top line of the zone (for some reason).  And by all accounts, the pitchers, hitters, and managers are okay with this as long as the zone is consistent.

Not anymore.  They receive feedback from the league after every game on how they performed vs the book zone.  Unless you meant that there are no consequences for being bad which is still mostly true.

Edited by WBT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

I mean if you actually thought about it you'd figure it out. JT Realmuto knows the called strike zone and that's what he's framing to. You're smart enough to know that if you weren't so busy trying to jump on every one of my posts you see. Once again you're not disputing any of the actual facts or evidence. That box is showing you the top of the rulebook strike zone for Narváez.

 

Rule book strike zone?  You don't even watch baseball, do you?

And spare us the persecution complex.  You're better than that.  Seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

The rule book strike zone hasn’t been a thing since the 1950’s.

 

2 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

That is pretty much what I know to be what a vertical mlb strike zone is at this time. Bottom of knees to belt/belly button.  

 

2 hours ago, TexArcher said:

Pretty much this.

And umps are allowed to have their own strike zone (for some reason).  It's perfectly acceptable for an ump to give the pitcher an inch or two off the edge of the plate, but not the top line of the zone (for some reason).  And by all accounts, the pitchers, hitters, and managers are okay with this as long as the zone is consistent.

The problem with Angel Hernandez is that you can throw the exact same pitch four times in a row and get a 2-2 count.  He's like a Magic 8 Ball back there.

The high strike had started to gain momentum in the last half decade or so but is now fading back out of the game again. That's a problem. If MLB would enforce the actual strike zone there would be a huge uptick in strikeouts at first, sure, but hitters would adjust. My opinion is you'd start to see more contact hitters again as the K/HR ratio for a pure slugging approach would get too high.

24 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Rule book strike zone?  You don't even watch baseball, do you?

And spare us the persecution complex.  You're better than that.  Seriously.

You seem to be struggling with the difference between people knowing what is and what they want to see. I'm in favor of computerized strike calls and having them enforce the rulebook strike zone. I've made that clear plenty of times. If the rulebook zone is too high then adjust the rule. I think it will help the game but either way simply having a consistent zone can't possibly be anything but good.

And if MLB moves to computerized ball/strike calls one would think that it would be based on the actual rulebook strike zone. But then the discussion about who is setting the top and bottom of the zone gets started and that's a whole other discussion.

Edited by Huckleberry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

The high strike had started to gain momentum in the last half decade or so but is now fading back out of the game again.

Yes, somewhere along the way the 1990’s Braves strike zone went away and something closer to the rule book zone emerged. The zone became “taller” but more narrow than what was called in the 90’s and early 2000’s. 
 

But it never reverted to the true rule book strike zone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

And if MLB moves to computerized ball/strike calls one would think that it would be based on the actual rulebook strike zone.

Why would one think that?  It's not in the minors where they're testing out the technology.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Why would one think that?  It's not in the minors where they're testing out the technology.  

If it’s not the rule book strike zone, please enlighten us to what strike zone they are actually using?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TonyTexas said:

If it’s not the rule book strike zone, please enlighten us to what strike zone they are actually using?

I don't know, but all you have to do is watch literally one AB from a minor league game and you'll see they aren't calling strikes at the armpit level, so it's clearly not the rule book strike zone.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about deciding the strike zone you want, and then codifying it in the rule book. 
but baseball has always been, and is still, full of people that believe in all sorts of unwritten rules and norms and that they should remain so, as an almost esoteric delineator for those who really get the game. 
 

some of those norms are being challenged and some are changing, but I don’t see much resistance to the idea of it all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The armpit isn't the rulebook strike zone (well it is in Little League). Do you even watch baseball? 

The biggest adjustment issues they've had from player and umpire statements are absolutely at the top and bottom of the zone. We saw the guy who squatted a foot to bunt complain and his manager got ejected I think. Umpires have stated they thought TrackMan called balls were strikes at the knees to taller batters. There are plenty of clips of batters complaining about strikes just under the letters. 

 

Edited by Huckleberry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, TonyTexas said:

If it’s not the rule book strike zone, please enlighten us to what strike zone they are actually using?

since the mid 90s it's been kneecaps to top of the belt.  nobody calls the upper part of the official strike zone which extends to mid torso.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The official strike zone is the area over home plate from the midpoint between a batter's shoulders and the top of the uniform pants -- when the batter is in his stance and prepared to swing at a pitched ball -- and a point just below the kneecap. In order to get a strike call, part of the ball must cross over part of home plate while in the aforementioned area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I don't know, but all you have to do is watch literally one AB from a minor league game and you'll see they aren't calling strikes at the armpit level, so it's clearly not the rule book strike zone.  

You pretty much lost your argument with this post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TonyTexas said:

You pretty much lost your argument with this post. 

How about this then?

https://tht.fangraphs.com/the-physics-of-roboump/
 

Quote

This definition leaves plenty of room for interpretation as far as the vertical part of the zone is concerned. Many batters have a straight upward stance and move into a crouch only as they swing. Others start in a deep crouch and become more upright as they unload. Not to mention that the knee cap may be hard to spot if the batter wears loose pants.

PITCHf/x originally used poorly paid “stringers” to sit in a dark room under the stands and manually turn a dial to set the top and bottom of the zone on the video image of the batter. Saunders reports that Statcast uses the previous calls of major league umpires to build a database of the top and bottom of the strike zone for each hitter.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Scraps said:

And lets at least give some props to this dude, because this is the best card I have ever seen from April 19th:

 

he missed the first pitch of the game and then didn't miss again. i doubt we'll see a performance like that the rest of the season. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, T-shirt Sip said:

The last one was the closest one and the batter lost his mind. I would have wanted to see his reaction if he was batting on the 2nd video. That one was waaaayyy inside. 

It was overall frustration from watching Hernandez botch all kinds of calls (against both teams) the entire night.  That last strike call was simply the last straw for Schwarbs.

 

EDIT:  Ztejas said it better than me above.  I should have read the entire thread before posting.

Edited by Carl Spackler
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...