MLB Has an Optics Problem with Umpires and Strike Zone Displays

[Parfigliano]

4 hours ago, USAFChief said:

This is a great piece of writing, Nick.

I'm also  vaguely opposed to an electronic strike zone, but the situation has gotten out of control via the little box on TV. It's all anyone wants to talk about.

MLB got pushed into a corner and now it's just a matter of time for an electronic strike zone. 

Which, BTW, won't stop fans bitching about the strike zone. 

The most egregious thing Saturday was it appeared, to me at least, as the Wallner K was intentional by the home plate ump. He knew the pitch was a ball, but was tired of the complaints and was letting Wallner and the Twins know it. That can't happen.

Your correct the call on Wallner was intentional.  The ump should be disciplined.

[Parfigliano]

1 hour ago, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

That's not the argument - that any single team is being singled out. That game on Saturday clearly favored Cleveland over Minnesota in a major way, regardless of their intentions to do so.

MLB has the ability to remove game-altering calls like this and many more that happen every single day. It's a no-brainer. 

The problem is there are no consequeces for people who are demonstratively literally terrible at their job.  Remove (fire) one repeatedly game altering ump.  The rest will get the message.

[Fire Dan Gladden]

MLB has many very good umpires and a handful that are utterly atrocious.  It is MLB's fault for not getting a handle on the umpires union.  MLB's inability to fire bad umpires is the major problem here, not technology.

Technology isn't going away.  Uniformity would help the viewer, but MLB has taken the stance they do not want to share the technology on how they enforce the rules (ie the strike zone) because of said umpires union.
 
 

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

33 minutes ago, Schmoeman5 said:

Game altering? You're assuming that. The Twins players were missing plenty of pitches in the SZ. Could the bigger strike zone have induced Twins hitters to swing at balls they normally wouldn't? Perhaps. The comments that are made, is that it's a mlb conspiracy singling out the Twins. And listening to Morneau. He's right in the sense that a 2-1 count is different than a 1-2 count or whatever it is at the time. Still. You guys all want perfect. Even with automated strike zone you'll never get perfect. 125 years of baseball. And you want this.  Good for you. And how is it going to be better? That's my opinion. You're entitled to yours.

By definition missed calls alter the game. Even moreseo, when umps decide to call a ball a strike because a batter called them out for missing a previous call (this happens all the time) it completely changes the at bat which changes the flow of the game, whether you'd like to acknowledge it or not. 

I'm not sure why you're so dead set on conflating two completely separate arguments. Yes, the Twins could have batted better and won the game - but that's not the argument here. You're bringing that up and amplifying a conspiracy that one person said in a Twins Daily game thread for what reason?

Yes, I want perfection. Everyone should! Even though the automated zone isn't perfect, it is without a doubt better than what we have now and it's extraordinarily easy for MLB to implement it. One of the most obvious no brainers out there.

It will be better because we wouldn't have to deal with crap like this from Angel Hernandez any more. Which isn't a controversial thing to say.

 

[Jocko87]

50 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I rarely disagree with you Ash, but in this case I think you're off base.

Umpires should never, ever make calls to influence behavior.  That equals intentionally influencing the outcome. That's something that should get an umpire suspended and fined.

 

Agree with this completely, as an active umpire myself.  I'm all for permanently throwing out anyone who can be proven to do it on purpose. Unfortunately, the human element is undefeated and game conditions can sometimes effect us without even being aware. It's something I'm always reminding myself, don't make a second mistake to correct the first mistake.

As a coaching point, it's probably a fair strategy, knowing the reality of the situations.

Before I get anywhere near support for robots, I need to see a couple things first. Nevermind that I have my doubts about the technology.

The first and most important item is to get everyone looking at the same thing. The Fox box is different from the ESPN box is different from the Ballys box is different from the MLB official box is different from the umpire scorecards box. Our current view is so skewed by a random square a guy in the production truck drew that it's basically impossible to know how accurate the edges are. Gross misses are obvious but that's part of my second point.

I, and many others have shared the umpire scorecard from the Cleveland game. It's fun to talk about but means absolutely nothing when evaluating that umpire. Just the fact that we think a square drawn on paper gives us an idea of how the ump performed is an indicator of how distorted our view is. Jose Ramirez is 5'9, Matt Wallner 6'4. Their boxes are far different but here we are, damn ump was outside the box. Do any TV feeds adjust the box for Altuve or Judge? Not that I'm aware of. We can't discuss this reasonably without looking at the correct information.

My second thing is we need to know there is a performance review standard happening. I'm the first to say discipline should be private but the longer Angel Hernandez working playoff games the more we can assume the discipline is lacking. We should be seeing young new guys all the time, with young fresh eyes. The human element is valuable, even if it let's us down from time to time.

[Schmoeman5]

36 minutes ago, CCHOF5yearstoolate said:

By definition missed calls alter the game. Even moreseo, when umps decide to call a ball a strike because a batter called them out for missing a previous call (this happens all the time) it completely changes the at bat which changes the flow of the game, whether you'd like to acknowledge it or not. 

I'm not sure why you're so dead set on conflating two completely separate arguments. Yes, the Twins could have batted better and won the game - but that's not the argument here. You're bringing that up and amplifying a conspiracy that one person said in a Twins Daily game thread for what reason?

Yes, I want perfection. Everyone should! Even though the automated zone isn't perfect, it is without a doubt better than what we have now and it's extraordinarily easy for MLB to implement it. One of the most obvious no brainers out there.

It will be better because we wouldn't have to deal with crap like this from Angel Hernandez any more. Which isn't a controversial thing to say.

 

I did acknowledge that. Can you comprehend? Pulling out Angel Hernandez. That's funny. And for someone who complains about poaching posts you sure have a habit of doing it. You're a I know everything guy. It's not one person's comment that I was amplifying. It's a constant on the game threads by quite a few posters. To the point of being ridiculous.

[Whitey333]

Yes the home plate umpiring has been going downhill for quite some time.  Saturdays "performance" was a joke.  Quite honestly that umpire should have been suspended or demoted.  Hopefully someone talked to him about his game calling.  22 missed strikes with 19 against the Twins is not very good.  However bad the Twins offensive performance has been I find it equally as bad as people blaming wallner and other twin hitters for the terrible calls.  After watching a lot of games around the league the home plate umpiring is a big topic around baseball.  Right up there with all the injuries to pitchers.

[Craig Arko]

I suppose I could go with an electronic strike zone that is associated to a shock collar worn by the home plate umpire. They’d improve quickly. 

[Cris E]

The only problem I have with this piece is that the various boxes are not new.  They've been on-screen for about 23 years and have gotten better over time, so why is it only a problem now? Is it because we can perhaps do better? Then let's do that: adjust the zones to match batters, share that common definition and require official broadcasters to follow it or take it off the screen. It might take a year or two to get the technical kinks out, but it shouldn't be that hard.

Our standards are so high these days that it's beginning to reduce the joy in the game. An occasional poor performance by a rookie umpire should kind of be expected, yet this one's being vilified like he's some sort of Eric Gregg, who essentially gave away a World Series game while the world watched (without the K Zone.)  I personally would like the human element to remain in the game, but honestly there are so many guys throwing so hard today that I think an automated zone is the best way to ensure fairness and repeatability.  And even if it isn't perfect right out of the box where a Jose Altuve might always have to defend a larger strike zone than an Aaron Judge, he might enjoy the consistency on the corners. Youngsters are already there, waiting for the calls to even out. I would like to see the step taken.

[ashbury]

3 hours ago, h2oface said:

Many managers/coaches in all sports, and players, too, also feel that by expressing your concern in a notorious manner will get you the next questionable call in your favor "to even it out", and many times, it seems to work - just the opposite of the behavior in question making calls go against you. Go figure. The common factor? Emotion is involved to make a correct and accurate call, and that is the main problem and must be removed.

The key is to get your point across without "showing up" Blue.  Make your point, get some satisfaction maybe.  But show up Blue, fuggedaboutit.

A bit of a fine art, but also common sense, and I think most folks who work between the lines figure things out.  Of course this is only my own opinion, from the outside looking in.

[ashbury]

4 hours ago, USAFChief said:

I rarely disagree with you Ash, but in this case I think you're off base.

Umpires should never, ever make calls to influence behavior.  That equals intentionally influencing the outcome. That's something that should get an umpire suspended and fined.

 

Maybe to a large degree our disagreement is over what "is" versus what "should be".  Further nuance as to maintaining authority could be a good discussion for the next time I see you at AFL or wherever.

[jimmyc]

How does a former Umpire get away with saying that the umpires actually call an egg-shaped strike zone?  My mind wanted to explode on that one!

[jorgenswest]

50 minutes ago, jimmyc said:

How does a former Umpire get away with saying that the umpires actually call an egg-shaped strike zone?  My mind wanted to explode on that one!

A 2D slice that is a representation of the 3D zone will geometrically look more oval. Pitches in the center horizontally center particularly at the top will have more space to drop in or out of the zone. Pitches on the corners don’t have that space as there is a better chance they will move laterally out of the strike zone.

 

[Al from SoDak]

9 hours ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

I struggled watching that Saturday game also.  I have several comments/opinions...

1. No to coach's challenges.  The game is already too slow.

2. Yes to an auto-call based on the box.  I recall hearing they were experimenting with a mike in the ump's ear telling him the call.  I like that approach.

3. If Bally is going to show the box, make it match the box that the ump is using.  I recall reading that they get graded by a MLB box which differs.

4. I cannot tell, but does the box change based on the batter?  It should be different especially for the giants like Judge.  I recall Bill Veek having a tiny guy (can't recall his name) who drew a walk every time because of his supper small strike zone based on his size difference.  That's back to the days when the strike zone varied based on the player's letters (or arm pits) to their knees.  Not sure but I doubt that the box changes based on the batter.

OK, time to get off my soap box.

Veeck's guy was Eddie Gaedel. 1 plate appearance. Career OBP...1.000.

[D.C Twins]

Sorry Nick, but when the technology is there and better.... you don't just decide to 'ignore the man behind the curtain' and get rid of live strike zone results because the optics are bad.

The optics are bad because home plate umpires calling balls/strikes is an antiquated system.

The ultimate transition to automated strike zone calls in MLB is a question of  'when' and not an 'if'... 

 

 

 

[nclahammer]

I watched a St. Paul Saints game last year with the robo umps and it was refreshing not to constantly see batters looking back at the ump or hear the chirping from the benches about a call.  The home plate ump had a receiver on the back of her belt that relayed the call to her and then she made it.   It was fluid and the game went along smoothly.  The technology is there, why not use it.

[Karbo]

I agree the Bally box isn't completely accurate. It is however close. I don't mind seeing an ump consistently calling a slightly wider or taller or shorter zone than the box shows. But in the last few years that consistency has gotten much worse. They need to do something to either help the umps or get rid of the bad ones. Pitchers are throwing harder than ever, with more movement than ever. If the umps can't keep up with them (and I can see why) then its time to make a change.

[joefish]

Remove the white box on the video screen. 

[FlyingFinn]

5 hours ago, nclahammer said:

I watched a St. Paul Saints game last year with the robo umps and it was refreshing not to constantly see batters looking back at the ump or hear the chirping from the benches about a call.  The home plate ump had a receiver on the back of her belt that relayed the call to her and then she made it.   It was fluid and the game went along smoothly.  The technology is there, why not use it.

The players that have come up with the robo umps/challenge calls really know the strike zone, even better than some of the umps. I'm curious, are the new umps that come up through the system also better at knowing the strike zone? Or are they worse because they relied on robo umps too much? Just curious.

Your take above is the same thing I see in tennis. They run the replay. The ball is in or it is out and not a single person complains. Every TV network should get the same strike zone template for each batter. The differing zones for size of batter is the thing that makes it different than tennis.

[jmlease1]

Nick has it nailed that regardless of the reality baseball has a perception problem regarding umpiring, especially with balls and strikes. while no one expects 100% accuracy, the egregious calls really stand out. (Ed Julien's experience against the Dodgers last season stands out, when he was rung up on a "strike" call that was clearly outside, confirmed by aerial view cams, and so dreadful that the Dodgers broadcast crew started laughing about it.) Those are the ones that you just can't have happen.

The broadcast box being out of synch with how the umps are graded is a real issue, because the broadcast box is not going away. It's an innovation that fans like and would complain about loudly if MLB somehow managed to bully the broadcasts into dumping it, and that would lead to a bigger perception problem: that MLB did it to cover something up. If they can get it consistently closer to what umps are graded on it would certainly help.

Overall the umps are pretty good, even if there are some holdovers who act as if they're who people came to see. (considering training for officials in every sport they usually mention that your best performances are ones where no one remembers you were there, this is a bit odd...but weird umps like Ron Luciano (who was actually very skilled) did make the game more fun) But if MLB can't get a handle on this the cries for the electronic zone are only going to get louder. I'm increasingly ready, because I'm sick of talking about an ump having a shocker.