Twins Will Be Among Biggest Beneficiaries of Automated Ball-Strike System in 2026

[Matthew Trueblood]

Image courtesy of © Matt Blewett-Imagn Images

No team in baseball got fewer called strikes on pitches outside the strike zone in 2025 than the Minnesota Twins' 295, according to Statcast. The cocktail of a pitching staff that throws lots of non-fastballs (seeking chases outside the zone, rather than calls on the edges of it) and poor pitch framing by catcher Ryan Jeffers led to very few marginal strikes for the team. They were middle-of-the-pack, meanwhile, with 513 called balls on pitches technically within the strike zone.

Twins batters were similarly maltreated by the umpires, but again, it had something to do with the way they played. Minnesota hitters had 411 strikes called on pitches outside the zone (third-most), and 528 balls called on pitches within the zone (10th-most). These numbers don't even out, not just because the Twins had the wrong side of umpiring over the course of the season, but because of the well-documented change in the size of the strike zone resulting from a shift in the way the league evaluates arbiters that was rolled out over the winter.

The patient approach taken by Twins hitters leads, unavoidably, to lots of balls called on pitches that are "too close to take," by the standards of previous eras in the game. It also results in some called strikes, though, that might technically be outside the zone, but are still the responsibility of the hitter. They really were too close to take; you have to find ways to cover the zone better.

Next season, though, there will be a greater recourse than nodding and adjusting. Jeffers, any of the pitchers he works with, and all Twins batters will have the right to challenge ball-strike calls they deem to have been wrong. Each team will get two challenges to start each game, and they only lose them if they challenge a call and the system confirms it. In other words, if an umpire is consistently wrong and a team gets the hang of challenging calls when they are, they might flip a dozen calls within a single game.

The net of -101 calls on umpire errors in 2025 placed the Twins ahead of only the White Sox (-143) and Astros (-126) among the 30 teams. Five clubs (the Tigers, Diamondbacks, Blue Jays, Yankees and Giants) netted at least 100 calls in the opposite direction, so the magnitude of this effect could be significant. Imagine if Byron Buxton had the right to tap his helmet and overturn this crummy call.

That would have flipped a strikeout to a walk; it's a big deal. At other times, though, the effects can be almost as large even when they're much more subtle. Consider this call, also against Buxton.

The difference between 0-1 and 1-0 is huge. When a righty batter started a count ahead of a lefty pitcher 1-0, in 2025, they batted .260/.377/.437. When the hurler got ahead 0-1, they held those hitters to .224/.269/.352. Every missed call on a first pitch is worth roughly 6.7% of a run; that kind of difference can add up fast. 

Next year, the challenge for all 30 teams will be to make good use of the new system. The Twins have more space to use it than most teams do, because if they simply challenged every pitch, they would have had a higher success rate this year than almost anyone else. Of course, it's not that simple. The two Twins hitters who saw the most out-of-zone pitches called strikes were Carlos Correa (already gone) and Trevor Larnach (a non-tender candidate). They took lots of pitches, and they figure to do so again in 2026, but they do need to moderate and modify their approach. If they make good individual and collective adjustments, they might have more overall success, but it might not come in the form of more favorable calls at the edges of the zone.

There's also the question of how competent each player in a lineup (and especially each catcher who takes their place behind the dish when a team is pitching) can get at challenging pitches. That will be a point of emphasis for smart teams in the spring, because ideally, players will feel empowered to make as many challenges as possible—without getting two wrong and leaving themselves without the right to appeal during the late innings of a game. Teamwork will matter, but if the Twins default to having hitters be extremely conservative with their challenges, they might only realize the benefits of the system on one side of the runs ledger.

With new personnel entering the picture late in the 2025 season and more changes coming, the Twins should be one of the teams best positioned to get better by being good at using the challenge system in 2026. It's not as simple as operating the same way and tapping one's head more often, though. Their efforts to get the better side of calls whenever possible have to be mitigated by a broader focus on playing winning baseball, overall.

View full article

[tarheeltwinsfan]

A lot of new strategy to think about. Thanks for an interesting article.

[mikelink45]

The biggest benefactors will be us old timers who believed a strike and ball were defined by the rules not by the quick movement of the catchers glove.

[Matthew Trueblood]

16 minutes ago, mikelink45 said:

The biggest benefactors will be us old timers who believed a strike and ball were defined by the rules not by the quick movement of the catchers glove.

That's (sorry; you're gonna hate this pun) very weird framing, Mike! The strike zone has been MASSIVELY more accurate over the last 5 years than in the 5 years before; more accurate in the last 10 years than in the 10 years before; more accurate in the least 20 years than in the 20 years before. Technology has done nothing but make the zone more and more precise and uniform *and less and less distorted by individuals' performance or judgment* and pitch framing isn't anything remotely akin to a new concept! Branch Rickey taught it; Bill Terry boasted of it; Jim Sundberg and Bob Boone were commended for it.

All the last 15-20 years have done is allow us to quantify what was already happening, and again, only within a broader context of umpires calling a zone that more closely accords to both their fellow umps' zones and the rule book—a rule book that includes necessarily subjective judgments, anyway, like where the hollow of one's knees are or what constitutes each batter's normal crouch and the level of the letters on their jersey when they assume it!

It's important that everyone understand that there's nothing old-school about disdaining pitch framing—and that the ABS challenge system might actually lead to a less evenly called/enforced zone than we've seen throughout the pitch-tracking era. It almost certainly WON'T result in an increase in uniformity or accuracy. It will slightly diminish but come nowhere near eliminating the impact of framing, and all of the value no longer accrued by catchers presenting pitches will now be diffused among catchers, batters and pitchers challenging calls or not. 

[Doctor Gast]

ABS is long overdue. It should have been implemented during COVID to create distance between catcher/ batter & older plate ump, when they were going crazy defining rules. We need to keep umpires calling the game; to keep the human element in the game is a bunch of bunk, invented by teams like the NYY to maintain their advantage. Baseball is a game of fractions of an inch, so we need technology to keep fairness in the game. If we want a human element in the game? Limit analytics.

[jorgenswest]

The history of catcher equipment is fascinating and a lot has to do with getting more strikes. Better pads and pads on the outside of the uniform in the later 1800s allowed catchers to crowd the strike zone more. The circular pocket of the 1920s allowed catchers to pocket more balls but they were still using two hands. Johnny Bench and Randy Hundley were the first to catch one handed with the innovation of a hinged catcher glove. They were both known for their ability to get more strikes. Catchers have always worked hard to capture more strikes. The change recently was the ability to measure that skill with tech. Framing has always been around and I have appreciated the catchers with the skill to do it well.

[nicksaviking]

1 hour ago, Matthew Trueblood said:

It's important that everyone understand that there's nothing old-school about disdaining pitch framing—and that the ABS challenge system might actually lead to a less evenly called/enforced zone than we've seen throughout the pitch-tracking era. It almost certainly WON'T result in an increase in uniformity or accuracy. It will slightly diminish but come nowhere near eliminating the impact of framing, and all of the value no longer accrued by catchers presenting pitches will now be diffused among catchers, batters and pitchers challenging calls or not. 

It will be uniform when they stop playing around and have every pitch called by ABS, not just the challenges. Half measures are frustrating, but I get it; too many fans hate any kind of change so they have to ease into it.

Once we're done with pitch-framing all together, the game will improve though. Catchers can be better hitters if you don't have to also judge them on the silly skill of fooling umpires, and the pitchers who are best at hitting the zone (or intentionally not hitting it should that be their prerogative), will be better rewarded; just like they always should be.

Valuing catchers on pitch framing is like valuing politicians on their deftness at lying. Yeah, it's part of the game right now, but we'd all be better off without it.

[jorgenswest]

There will be new aspects of catcher skill and with only 2 challenges framing will still be critical. Some will be very good at identifying balls that are strikes. Patrick Bailey speaks of the skill to goad hitters into making challenges that will fail.

Challenge success rate for catchers in AAA was 56%. My guess is that some will be much better than that and others much worse. I hope Jeffers lands on the plus side.

Pitchers and batters were less successful than catchers in challenging pitches.

 

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, nicksaviking said:

Valuing catchers on pitch framing is like valuing politicians on their deftness at lying. Yeah, it's part of the game right now, but we'd all be better off without it.

I prefer to use an analogy to Public Relations, seeking to place your product in the best possible light each time, accepting that the buying public will judge.

[mikelink45]

3 hours ago, Matthew Trueblood said:

That's (sorry; you're gonna hate this pun) very weird framing, Mike! The strike zone has been MASSIVELY more accurate over the last 5 years than in the 5 years before; more accurate in the last 10 years than in the 10 years before; more accurate in the least 20 years than in the 20 years before. Technology has done nothing but make the zone more and more precise and uniform *and less and less distorted by individuals' performance or judgment* and pitch framing isn't anything remotely akin to a new concept! Branch Rickey taught it; Bill Terry boasted of it; Jim Sundberg and Bob Boone were commended for it.

All the last 15-20 years have done is allow us to quantify what was already happening, and again, only within a broader context of umpires calling a zone that more closely accords to both their fellow umps' zones and the rule book—a rule book that includes necessarily subjective judgments, anyway, like where the hollow of one's knees are or what constitutes each batter's normal crouch and the level of the letters on their jersey when they assume it!

It's important that everyone understand that there's nothing old-school about disdaining pitch framing—and that the ABS challenge system might actually lead to a less evenly called/enforced zone than we've seen throughout the pitch-tracking era. It almost certainly WON'T result in an increase in uniformity or accuracy. It will slightly diminish but come nowhere near eliminating the impact of framing, and all of the value no longer accrued by catchers presenting pitches will now be diffused among catchers, batters and pitchers challenging calls or not. 

I have no problem with your framing your argument the way you have. Whether it's correct or not I will have to wait for a electronic determination

[HerbieFan]

I can't wait.  I can't believe it's become more important for a catcher to fool an umpire than it is to just catch the ball, block a ball in the dirt or throw out a baserunner.  Now that framing will, theoretically, become far less of a thing, here's hoping catchers become good at playing their position again.

[h2oface]

The game will be the biggest beneficiary when this wimpy challenge system is soon replaced by every pitch being unbiasedly called by ABS, and catchers attend to their real job instead of this ridiculous pitch framing jerking the glove BS. 

[jorgenswest]

It has always been the real job of catchers to receive balls and make them look like strikes. That won’t change next year but I guess there will be a time when that part of a catcher’s job will change with full ABS. Search Johnny Bench and framing and you will see him explain how he would turn his glove to receive pitches in the various outside edges of the strike zone. It is now called framing and once called receiving but it has always been a part of being a catcher. Those nostalgic to the eras of Johnny Bench or Elston Howard should want to keep the skill of receiving a ball part of the game.

I am fine with the change but for me it should be all ABS or no ABS. The challenge system is unnecessary here. The result is immediate and it does not need the time for review. 

[DocBauer]

I applaud the change. I don't like 2 challenges due to the very nature of the game. 3 outs per inning over 9 innings, it should be 3 challenges. It just makes sense.

When I watched the Twins ST this past season, I can't recall hardly any mistakes made by Jeffers or Vazquez. They always seemed to be "right on it". 

I'm not saying Matt's numbers aren't accurate...they probably are...but it's ABHORENT that some teams have been victimized by so many poor calls in an age where umpiring has been more accurate than ever. And I've read the numbers that seem to back this up.

So how can some teams benefit and other teams don't? Makes zero sense, other than the human element. Do umpires have a prejudice? Even a subconscious one?

I like that the dugout can't ask for a replay. I'm not certain that the hitter is always the best judge. But I really like the idea a catcher can recognize a bad call.

But it makes we wonder about hitters and pitchers, not just from the Twins, but all players, adjusting to the ML level used to the ABS system and the challenge system. How much has the ABS and challenge system affected the development of certain players in their development?

If I'm not mistaken, the baseball used at AAA is the same ball used at the ML level. But the baseball used at AA and below is different.  Please tell me if this has changed.

So we have pitchers and hitters who come up from MILB WITHOUT consistency in regard to the BALL they play with, OR the SO? 

Sorry for my rant. I applaud the challenge system, but it should be 3 and not 2.

And MLB should be looking for consistency throughout baseball. There's no reason a $B industry doesn't have the same damn ball in all levels. 

The NBA, NFL, and CFB don't have different balls to play to play with.

I'm rambling and sorry for that. I am unsure for various reasons for the ABS system to be implemented permanently at this time. But I really like the challenge.  My only hope is the future Twins manager stresses how valuable those are. 

 

[dxpavelka]

So cute how so many folks think that this is going to eliminate any controversy involving balls and strikes.  It might.  But not nearly as much of it as folks think.  Even with replay we still have dozens if not hundreds of plays over the course of a season that one person sees one way and another person sees another way.  This isn't going to change that.  I suppose we COULD look at the Virtual Measurement system the NFL has implemented this season with quite a bit of success.  Of course the reason for that success is that they just don't SHOW us the close plays.  We never know the difference.  Just hear that the system has decided.  So there we go.  We'll just take the games off the television.  All games will only be on radio and we'll never see any bad calls.

[Trov]

Two things, first I wish we had full ABS and not the challenge system, and I am sure it will be full in a few years they just wanted to ease in the system for fans, mostly, and some players to get used to it. Teams will have to figure out times to use the challenges because if you get it wrong early on it not super important situations you may lose it in a super important situation. 

Second, pitch framing is not about moving the glove quickly into the zone.  Umpires have already decided ball or strike before all that, and they cannot see where the catcher is holding the glove.  I mean think about it, they are standing behind the umpire, the pitch comes in so fast, do you really think the umpire can see where the glove is being positioned?  No they do not.  However, I will agree pitch framing is a thing, but it is more based on the lack of movement by the catcher and and any movement he does have is toward the zone.  For example, if you set up inside and the ball is on the outside part of the plate, even if in the zone, the umpire thinks it must be outside the zone if on the boarder for how much the catcher needed to move to get it.  However, if he he does not move at all and the ball is on the boarder inside the umpire will think it is a strike, even more so if the movement of the catcher is toward the zone.

Umpiring is a very hard job, and the worst part is that it is greatly affected by bias of the umpire.  They are very good at their job, but research has shown on the boarder calls they are no better than flipping a coin. That is where the need for the ABS is on the calls the human eye cannot get right on better than 50-50. 

[Danchat]

11 hours ago, DocBauer said:

The NBA, NFL, and CFB don't have different balls to play to play with.

The NFL actually does have different balls they use for kicking. I believe that's one of the reasons you see so many long FGs made.

[Whitey333]

Very interesting analytical article.  Great for this era of baseball.  I would imagine that umpiring behind the plate in today's baseball is tougher than ever.  Pitchers throwing faster, harder, and spins making much tougher to call pitchers.  Not like in the older days when veteran pitchers like Maddox could consistently get called strikes 2-3 inches off the plate while the catcher just gives a good target and doesn't move his glove.  Pitcher hits his spot and a strike us called even though they were usually off the plate.  What I hate the last several years is catchers pulling in balls to the strike zone to fool the umpires.  Gid it is so little leagues to do it but it works.  I would guess the umps don't like that either as it makes them look bad.  Catching as a position has gone so down hill the last few years anyway.  I welcome the ABS system.  Its long overdue.  The umpires miss a lot if calls in crucial times.

[IndianaTwin]

I'm sure there's a better way to do this than what I'm suggesting, but I think the team needs to also be testing players in spring training (or even beyond) to see which players can be trusted to make challenges as hitters. For example, when a hitter is at the plate, have them tap their waist after a pitch if it it was a pitch they would have liked to challenge. Then evaluate which players would have been right or wrong. 

[mnfireman]

On 10/27/2025 at 7:46 PM, h2oface said:

The game will be the biggest beneficiary when this wimpy challenge system is soon replaced by every pitch being unbiasedly called by ABS, and catchers attend to their real job instead of this ridiculous pitch framing jerking the glove BS. 

No system is infallible. As for being unbiased, the zone is only as good as the parameters that define it - the zones we see on TV, on MLB.com, ESPN.com, Baseball Savant, etc... have all shown the same pitch in different spots. It should get better, we'll see...