Park: Twins Emphasizing Catcher Defense, Framing

[Seth Stohs]

https://www.mlb.com/news/twins-putting-premium-on-catcher-framing

 

Do-Hyoung Park wrote an article tonight on the role that Tanner Swanson, the Twins minor league catching coordinator, is having in big league camp. The Twins are putting a large emphasis on pitching framing and receiving. 

 

 

"I think the industry has understood for a long time the value of receiving and pitch framing relative to other things that catchers have to do," Swanson said. "I don't know if the industry has been that in tune to how you can optimize these things."

 

There are quotes from Jason Castro and Ben Rortvedt on the value that they have found, not only from emphasizing the value, but from having data to validate or verify where they are. 

[Nine of twelve]

 

https://www.mlb.com/news/twins-putting-premium-on-catcher-framing

 

Do-Hyoung Park wrote an article tonight on the role that Tanner Swanson, the Twins minor league catching coordinator, is having in big league camp. The Twins are putting a large emphasis on pitching framing and receiving. 

 

 

There are quotes from Jason Castro and Ben Rortvedt on the value that they have found, not only from emphasizing the value, but from having data to validate or verify where they are. 

The day can't come soon enough that framing becomes unnecessary. The essence of framing is to try to create optical illusions that make the umpire call strikes on pitches that are outside the zone. Automated pitch calling systems are already outperforming major league umpires and this needs to be implemented as soon as it is feasible.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

The day can't come soon enough that framing becomes unnecessary. The essence of framing is to try to create optical illusions that make the umpire call strikes on pitches that are outside the zone. Automated pitch calling systems are already outperforming major league umpires and this needs to be implemented as soon as it is feasible.

It's not just optical illusions... strikes get called as balls due to bad framing too..

 

I'm in favor of automated systems though. Baseball really needs that. 

[luckylager]

 

The day can't come soon enough that framing becomes unnecessary. The essence of framing is to try to create optical illusions that make the umpire call strikes on pitches that are outside the zone. Automated pitch calling systems are already outperforming major league umpires and this needs to be implemented as soon as it is feasible.

 

And the day that happens will be the day I cease to be a fan. As the human element is stripped away,  the soul of the game is lost. I don't want to watch a video game. 

[ewen21]

FanGraphs money, fantasy leagues, automated strike zones....

 

There exists a certain coterie of sophists who want to over-intellectualize baseball. Make it perfect. It's like musical groups using all sorts of aids to perform live.

 

As far as pitch framing goes I say LA-Dee-freakin-DAH! Whatever. Word gets out a guy is a good pitch framer and he will get squeezed eventually. It's a silly metric

[bighat]

 

And the day that happens will be the day I cease to be a fan. As the human element is stripped away,  the soul of the game is lost. I don't want to watch a video game. 

 

What did you think about instant replay when it arrived, and how have your views on instant replay changed over the years? I'm not for an automated strike zone (seems very odd not to have an umpire back there), and I think having umpires on the field helps to pace the game and keep everyone in the flow. But I do kinda like instant replay in some regards.

[Doomtints]

Pitch framing has made the umpires better. There was a distinct advantage after the technique was first measured for those who could do it well, but I'm not sure what the advantage is now that umpires have adjusted.

 

In any case, I don't see championship rings coming just from pitch framing alone. Yes it should be taught and discussed -- never ignore a potential advantage -- but there are other important skills too.

[Jim Hahn]

I like the thought of having a catching coordinator. Having all the catchers and their coaches on the same page makes sense. Teaching the catchers to properly receive the ball so that the ump gets a good look at borderline pitches(mostly what pitch framing is) also makes sense. There are tradeoffs however. Most good framers often have difficulty in blocking pitches. Also the best framing in the world doesn't help if your pitcher doesn't have decent command. If the pitch isn't pretty darn close to where it's supposed to be, framing doesn't matter at all.

 

My thoughts on electronic pitch calling really need a separate post. But, even if the technology is there, we really need a better agreement on exactly where the strike zone should be for each hitter, not some one size fits all, no matter how short or tall you are.

[RatherBeGolfing]

Twins emphasizing catcher defense... *goes and puts Mitch Garver in there every other day*

[Doomtints]

 

Twins emphasizing catcher defense... *goes and puts Mitch Garver in there every other day*

 

Unfortunately, pitch framing is not catcher defense. Castro has more than his share of passed balls and wild pitches against, in fact him and Garver are not dissimilar in this regard.

 

It doesn't matter if you are a pitch framing wizard if pitches are going to the backstop because you more focused on your glove finesse than playing defense.

[RatherBeGolfing]

 

Unfortunately, pitch framing is not catcher defense. Castro has more than his share of passed balls and wild pitches against, in fact him and Garver are not dissimilar in this regard.

 

It doesn't matter if you are a pitch framing wizard if pitches are going to the backstop.

 

Oh I agree, Castro isn't great defensively either at this stage in his career but Garver is a total butcher back there.

 

I think the overall point is we "emphasize catcher defense" and put those two out there, Garver being even more of the liability.

[Doomtints]

I agree. I was a big fan of Garver for his hitting potential, but he really needs to defend better.

[nicksaviking]

From my recollection, Garver seemed to improve quite a bit in the second half of the season.

 

Though maybe I was wrong. Or maybe no one noticed because the Twins weren't giving anyone a reason to watch their games anymore.

[ahart10]

I equate pitch framing to flopping in other sports. Both are actions made with the intent to get a call made in your favor. Anything that can be done to minimize the effect of framing(flopping) should be done. Having goofy strike zones every night is just that, goofy. Turn on KZone and give the ump an ear piece to make strikes and balls. Let him make check swing, foul ball, or plays at the plate live with his own judgement.

[luckylager]

 

What did you think about instant replay when it arrived, and how have your views on instant replay changed over the years? I'm not for an automated strike zone (seems very odd not to have an umpire back there), and I think having umpires on the field helps to pace the game and keep everyone in the flow. But I do kinda like instant replay in some regards.

I dislike instant replay. The whole process is tedious and distracting. Blown calls are just part of the game and can be great topic of conversation afterwards (often years afterwards).  Baseball is like life - sometimes you catch a break, sometimes you don't. Things usually even out in the end. 

 

[drivlikejehu]

A pitch should be called a strike when it meets the criteria laid out in the rulebook. Whether or not an umpire makes a good decision has no bearing on whether the pitch met the criteria.

 

I'm not interested in watching baseball to see how close umpires can come to enforcing the rules. If the rules can be enforced more efficiently, that improves the game, period. Baseball is about baseball players, not umpires. Celebrating missed calls is like celebrating naked fans running onto the field as a great "human element" to the game.

[Nine of twelve]

 

 Baseball is like life - sometimes you catch a break, sometimes you don't. Things usually even out in the end. 

So let's just eliminate drunk driving laws. If someone gets killed by a drunk driver that's just a bad break. I guess it evens out in the end because they would have died eventually anyway.

An extreme analogy, to be sure. But the point I'm making is if there's a way to have players see the reward for making the proper play let's do it. A pitcher should be rewarded for throwing a strike and a batter should be rewarded for taking a ball. It shouldn't be tainted by bad judgement on the part of the human being charged with making the decision.

[lwarring]

I have always assumed a catcher's ability to call a game (pitch selection) has got to me their most valuable asset. What pitches are thrown and where they are thrown seems to be a huge factor in pitcher success and unless a pitcher is shaking off a catcher often, the catcher is the one deciding how best to deceive the hitter. Unless a pitcher has a very simple (therefore predictable) pitch pattern it would depend almost entirely on a catcher to determine pitch choice. A catcher that knows the right pitch sequence and placement would automatically make your pitching staff better and one that doesn't or is too predictable in their choices can only make hitting easier for the opposition.

As a batter, a catcher can only make an impact 3 to 5 times a game and even if they are great only make a positive impact 1 or 2 times a game on average. A starting pitcher can only make an impact once every five days and then rarely for more than 7 innings. So, wouldn't it make sense to accept a catcher that bats .125 if they can call a good game since they would be making a positive impact almost every game and for the entire game?

 

[luckylager]

 

So let's just eliminate drunk driving laws. If someone gets killed by a drunk driver that's just a bad break. I guess it evens out in the end because they would have died eventually anyway.

An extreme analogy, to be sure. But the point I'm making is if there's a way to have players see the reward for making the proper play let's do it. A pitcher should be rewarded for throwing a strike and a batter should be rewarded for taking a ball. It shouldn't be tainted by bad judgement on the part of the human being charged with making the decision.

 

It's a game. Played by and officiated by people. It's worked out pretty well for 150+ years. If the powers that be want to F with it, they can go right ahead. It just wont appeal to me. 

 

Take the technology to the next level and we can replace the players with robots who never strike out or make an error (and possibly can be programmed to understand your drunk driving analogy).

 

[DocBauer]

Makes sense to try and have your catchers on the same page, whether it's framing or something else. I agree game calling and overall defense are more important. But as was previously mentioned, framing isn't necessarily trying to "steal" a strike so much as making a close pitch be called a strike.

 

As to the whole umpire scenario, I prefer the human element. But while never perfect, you absolutely can teach, review, grade, promote and denote so there is greater accuracy and consistency behind the plate.

[Brock Beauchamp]

From my recollection, Garver seemed to improve quite a bit in the second half of the season.

 

Though maybe I was wrong. Or maybe no one noticed because the Twins weren't giving anyone a reason to watch their games anymore.

I found it far less painful to watch Garver as the season progressed. Early on, he was absolutely brutal. Then he smoothed out a bit in the second half.

[AlwaysinModeration]

Take the technology to the next level and we can replace the players with robots who never strike out or make an error.

I know that you will be hard to convince otherwise, but arguing for balls and strikes calls to be made correctly is really completely unrelated to the play of pitchers, hitters and fielders on the field.

 

While botched calls can be a cause of intense discussion amongst fans after the game (perhaps years after), I’d rather spend that timing discussing the performance of the players.

 

And I don’t think it takes the human element out of the game at all to ask that all the calls be made as right as possible. It just means the human element is focused on the performance, success and errors of the players, where it should be.

[ewen21]

 

I know that you will be hard to convince otherwise, but arguing for balls and strikes calls to be made correctly is really completely unrelated to the play of pitchers, hitters and fielders on the field.

While botched calls can be a cause of intense discussion amongst fans after the game (perhaps years after), I’d rather spend that timing discussing the performance of the players.

And I don’t think it takes the human element out of the game at all to ask that all the calls be made as right as possible. It just means the human element is focused on the performance, success and errors of the players, where it should be.

Automated strike zone reflects this "just download the app" mentality that has swept this nation like a disease.  Some things advancements are great in how they simplify our lives.  I don't see this as simplifying anything or eliminating problems with ball/strike calls.  Like anything that is computerized there will be problems and sometimes it just won't work properly so I don't see it as being the perfect tool to eliminate bias.

 

The "taking the human element out of the game" argument isn't even necessary.  I gain nothing from botched calls or controversy.  I have no interest in it.  I just think sports should be governed by people and not machines.  Automation is advancement in a lot of cases, but it isn't in sports.  I don't care for the replay, I don't think there should be a pitch clock and I am not "old fashioned" either.  Sports should be governed by people.  This isn't life and death.  If it were something that saved lives or tons of money then I am all for it.  We are talking about a game here.

 

And I have to say...baseball better get itself in order FAST.  I love it and always have, but it is not appealing to many young people anymore.  Kids don't play it and most don't watch it anymore.  Baseball is too corporate and too analytical, in my opinion.  It is becoming more and more detached. This automated strike zone crap is just another thing that keeps swinging the pendulum toward complete sterility.  This isn't like the elimination of cash tolls to EZPASS.  This is more like developing an app to wipe our asses for us and I know there are some people reading this who think that is a good idea (and that disturbs me quite frankly)

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Unfortunate that Park didn’t mention Willians Astudillo in this article. How is Astudillo’s framing? There must be a coach who could give a quote.

 

We know Astudillo’s receiving must be better than Garver’s, and his bat played much better than Castro’s last year, so should we start making the argument that Astudillo is the best catcher on the club?

[wabene]

Unfortunate that Park didn’t mention Willians Astudillo in this article. How is Astudillo’s framing? There must be a coach who could give a quote.

We know Astudillo’s receiving must be better than Garver’s, and his bat played much better than Castro’s last year, so should we start making the argument that Astudillo is the best catcher on the club?

The turtle pulls back into his shell only to snap out at the last instant and receive the ball from just inside the zone!

[dougd]

Dan Hayes has reported that the Twins graded Willians a tick above average in pitch framing last September, and are otherwise impressed with his agility and ability to block pitches.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Dan Hayes has reported that the Twins graded Willians a tick above average in pitch framing last September, and are otherwise impressed with his agility and ability to block pitches.

Thank you!! Very promising.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Automated strike zone reflects this "just download the app" mentality that has swept this nation like a disease. Some things advancements are great in how they simplify our lives. I don't see this as simplifying anything or eliminating problems with ball/strike calls. Like anything that is computerized there will be problems and sometimes it just won't work properly so I don't see it as being the perfect tool to eliminate bias.

 

The "taking the human element out of the game" argument isn't even necessary. I gain nothing from botched calls or controversy. I have no interest in it. I just think sports should be governed by people and not machines. Automation is advancement in a lot of cases, but it isn't in sports. I don't care for the replay, I don't think there should be a pitch clock and I am not "old fashioned" either. Sports should be governed by people. This isn't life and death. If it were something that saved lives or tons of money then I am all for it. We are talking about a game here.

 

And I have to say...baseball better get itself in order FAST. I love it and always have, but it is not appealing to many young people anymore. Kids don't play it and most don't watch it anymore. Baseball is too corporate and too analytical, in my opinion. It is becoming more and more detached. This automated strike zone crap is just another thing that keeps swinging the pendulum toward complete sterility. This isn't like the elimination of cash tolls to EZPASS. This is more like developing an app to wipe our asses for us and I know there are some people reading this who think that is a good idea (and that disturbs me quite frankly)

There are so many things about this that I disagree with, but let’s start with facts.

 

1) MLB’s “play ball” initiative has been very successful. Kids are playing baseball in increasing numbers. Football and concussions may have a role here.

 

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2018/04/12/Leagues-and-Governing-Bodies/Baseball.aspx

 

https://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/study-shows-youth-baseball-softball-participation-on-the-rise-051817

 

2) strike zone doesn’t cost anything and the idea of automation is the “easy way out”.

 

Clearly the game needs to change to fit the consumer’s taste/preference for consuming the product. When MLB was first started, every game was during the day, and the “purists” said “lights? Please! Your ruining the game”.

 

Now the game doesn’t fit how television is consumed anymore. Pace of play and all that has to do with TV slotting and advertising revenue. Games that go into “overtime” cost ad revenue. You can’t have advertising safety stock.

 

Same goes with the strike zone. No one tunes in to see the umpire insert himself into the game. As in football the subjectivity of officiating and the awful pauses in action that it causes is painful.

 

While robot umpires in football are science fiction right now, robot strike zone in baseball is 30 year old technology. It could be installed in every ballpark before 2020 opening day. Just do it! Pain free, consistent, reliable strike zone for every pitch. I’m so sick of Angel Hernandez inserting himself into every stinking game.

 

It’s not easy, it’s a huge change, fundamentally altering the game we love. That’s not swiping an app, it’s a huge culture shift.

[ewen21]

Sconnie, you're a good dude and I am not looking to convert anyone into my way of thinking. I have not researched kids interest in baseball but I have taught elementary school for 25 years in upstate NY and that what I'm drawing from when I make my statement. A friend of mine is a high school coach and is actually running an indoor clinic (for ages 3rd grade and up) today as I type this. I had this discussion last night with him and a few other guys.

 

Truthfully it isn't something that is a do or die issue with me. I have rolled with the changes my whole live and will continue to do so. That's for the information, but I still think that umpires in the traditional sense are just fine.

 

Before I get told "this is the wrong thread blah blah blah" I will bow out respectfully. I'll read those links you posted more carefully later

[Doomtints]

Baseball can keep the charade going by having technology announce the balls/strikes into an earpiece that only the umpire has access to. The umpire would then call the balls/strikes vocally or gesturally as he always would. This is ideal anyway because if there is a technical glitch, the umpire can call balls/strikes on his own without interrupting the game.

 

...and if the umpire wants to overrule the call in his ear he should be able to do so (at his own peril, because certainly people would find out).

 

To put this another way, baseball could move to automated/consistent balls/strikes calls without changing how the game appears to the fans or players in any way.