Mauer on wrong side of pitchf/x framing leaderboard

[Willihammer]

I was suprised to see the latest catcher framing leaderboard on baseball prospectus has one Joe Mauer among the league's worst. According to pitchf/x, he has stolen 192 out of zone strikes while bungling 340 inzone pitches for balls for the season.

 

Baseball Prospectus | Overthinking It: This Week in Catcher Framing, 7/26

 

Earlier this year Parker noted how Mauer is below average at getting low strikes calls but above average at getting high strike calls:

 

Joe Mauer and catcher framing - Blogs - Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum

 

I wonder if this is a case of the staff throwing a lot of pitches low in the zone, instead of high, as Anderson and the coaches always preach, thus negating Mauer's strength as a framer (getting the high strike).

[jm3319]

isn't this all highly subjective considering that the strike zone varies from ump to ump, game to game, pitch to pitch sometimes? A pitch my snag the corner on the nice little square the broadcast puts on the screen but that doesn't mean it's always a strike regardless of framing. I'd also love to hear an umpire's perspective on framing and whether or not they honestly care or pay attention to exactly where and how the catcher catches it. Maybe it actually does influence calls, maybe it doesn't. I don't know.

[jay]

isn't this all highly subjective considering that the strike zone varies from ump to ump, game to game, pitch to pitch sometimes? A pitch my snag the corner on the nice little square the broadcast puts on the screen but that doesn't mean it's always a strike regardless of framing. I'd also love to hear an umpire's perspective on framing and whether or not they honestly care or pay attention to exactly where and how the catcher catches it. Maybe it actually does influence calls, maybe it doesn't. I don't know.

 

PitchFX is accurate to tenths of an inch. There's very clearly differences between catchers across the data points of all the pitches they catch. Umpire variation would matter if you're comparing a small number of games, but becomes irrelevant when you're looking at a large sample.

 

The subject isn't perfectly understood or measureable yet, but I'd be curious to hear your ideas on what causes the differences between catchers if it isn't framing.

[Willihammer]

Due to the speed that these balls are thrown, the human brain is force to do a little guesswork on the final few feet of the trajectory. It would be almost impossible to not be influenced by catcher movements and glove placement, I think.

 

There are other factors that influence an umpire though. Count, platoon, and pitch type. This article speaks to that: More on Called Strikes on the Edge | FanGraphs Baseball

[Willihammer]

Simple look at the difference between total called strikes and pitchf/x strikes by team - the Twins are 2nd to worst.

 

http://i.imgur.com/SUuAG8X.png

[nicksaviking]

I wouldn't be surprised if the high/low strike variation is due to Mauer's hight. I'd imagine an umpire who is used to seeing a pitch caught at the catcher's knees might inherently assume it is a ball while Mauer might get the high calls due to the opposite reaction.

 

Also, as umpires tend to give calls to pitchers who are consistant or experienced, there's a good chance framing plays little role in the umpire decision when facing the Twins as they already have it made up in their mind that the Twins staff is made up of wet-behind-the-ears junk-ballers.

[Guest USAFChief]

PitchFX is accurate to tenths of an inch.

 

I'd be interested in learning how you know that.

[nicksaviking]

I'd be interested in learning how you know that.

 

Didn't you read the owner's manuel and warrenty?

[PseudoSABR]

How do these numbers vary from year to year? I'm just not sure there's an appreciable skill, here. There's just so many variables that contribute to how balls and strikes are called. Given how poor our pitchers are and their relative anonymity, I wonder if 'not getting the call' has more to do with who the pitcher is than which catcher is framing.

[edavis0308]

A bit unrelated, but it looks like he ranks very highly this year in CS%. Looks like he would be about 3rd with at least 500 innings caught. A bit off track, but refreshing nonetheless.

[ThePuck]

A bit unrelated, but it looks like he ranks very highly this year in CS%. Looks like he would be about 3rd with at least 500 innings caught. A bit off track, but refreshing nonetheless.

 

46% (tops in AL), league average 26%...

[jm3319]

How do these numbers vary from year to year? I'm just not sure there's an appreciable skill, here. There's just so many variables that contribute to how balls and strikes are called. Given how poor our pitchers are and their relative anonymity, I wonder if 'not getting the call' has more to do with who the pitcher is than which catcher is framing.

 

I was just thinking about this too. I'd be curious as to what his numbers would be like with Johan back in the day, or when the Twins actually had an MLB caliber pitcher or two on the roster, let alone one with a high enough "respect" factor to earn a call on the corner.

 

I'm not just blindly trying to defend Mauer, but I find it hard to believe he'd be among the very worst in the league at what is supposedly a basic part of the fundamentals of catching. He's been catching his whole life, he's very athletic, he has star-status and respect among the league. I could see him being average, or even a little below average, but being near dead last among all catchers? I'm thinking there's a lot more to this stat than just a catcher's ability.

[edavis0308]

46% (tops in AL), league average 26%...

 

Point taken. I searched all MLB and it included unqualified, so I didn't take much notice to the names ahead of him.

[ThePuck]

Point taken. I searched all MLB and it included unqualified, so I didn't take much notice to the names ahead of him.

 

I was just adding to the info you provided...backing up the point you were making rather than making a point myself :-)

[Willihammer]

I was just thinking about this too. I'd be curious as to what his numbers would be like with Johan back in the day, or when the Twins actually had an MLB caliber pitcher or two on the roster, let alone one with a high enough "respect" factor to earn a call on the corner.

 

I'm not just blindly trying to defend Mauer, but I find it hard to believe he'd be among the very worst in the league at what is supposedly a basic part of the fundamentals of catching. He's been catching his whole life, he's very athletic, he has star-status and respect among the league. I could see him being average, or even a little below average, but being near dead last among all catchers? I'm thinking there's a lot more to this stat than just a catcher's ability.

 

There are other factors, including a respect factor. Hitters have a respect factor too (Mauer gets a lot of respect as a hitter from umpires). All those other things are lumped in obviously. But we can compare some of the names on this same study from 2011, when Martin was a Yankee, Doumit was a Pirate, and Molina was a Blue Jay, and most of these names are still in the same spot 2 years later. Which leads me to believe that, after a few thousand pitches (probably less), all those other things more or less even out and what you're left looking at, primarily, is the catcher's framing skill. The year to year correlations, even the week to week correlations, are pretty good. Look at the leaderboards after less than 4 weeks worth of games (here:Baseball Prospectus | Overthinking It: This Week in Catcher Framing, 4/19) and again, the names and places are almost unchanged from the bigger studies that look at tens of thousands of pitches.

[StormJH1]

I was just thinking about this too. I'd be curious as to what his numbers would be like with Johan back in the day, or when the Twins actually had an MLB caliber pitcher or two on the roster, let alone one with a high enough "respect" factor to earn a call on the corner.

 

I'm not just blindly trying to defend Mauer, but I find it hard to believe he'd be among the very worst in the league at what is supposedly a basic part of the fundamentals of catching. He's been catching his whole life, he's very athletic, he has star-status and respect among the league. I could see him being average, or even a little below average, but being near dead last among all catchers? I'm thinking there's a lot more to this stat than just a catcher's ability.

 

Yes. And Willihammer's point about "respect" is a big one too. There are literally dozens of factors that go into this, and they include very subjective and situational things, like how long the game has been going, the mood of the umpire, home vs. away, respect for the pitcher, respect for the hitter. I'm sure anyone could add several others.

 

I have zero doubt that pitch framing is a "thing". Obviously, there are visual tricks and cues as to how the ball is caught and then shown to an umpire that could make a difference in a tough ball/strike call. I also think if you're a catcher who is a total jerk and you're framing over and over again in an obvious fashion, that would piss the umpire off. And I've basically never seen anything from Mauer to suggest that he's anything but respectful to everyone in the game.

 

It's an interesting thing to study, but much like any number of indirect baseball metrics, I'm just a not a big believer of its reliability and usefulness in creating general propositions, such as "Joe Mauer is good/bad at framing pitches".

[LaBombo]

It will be much easier to put my complete faith in pitchF/x framing stats when MLB starts using them as a grading and possibly even a disciplinary tool to police home plate umpiring.

 

Until then framing will be as much about umpires being good or bad at their jobs as it is about catchers being good or bad at framing.

[jay]

I'd be interested in learning how you know that.

 

I can't tell if there's snark in that or not. While I can't claim to have personally measured the exact error rate of PitchFX, I trust it as much as any other electronic measurement system. The technology is there and works in other industries, so...

 

There are literally dozens of factors that go into this, and they include very subjective and situational things, like how long the game has been going, the mood of the umpire, home vs. away, respect for the pitcher, respect for the hitter. I'm sure anyone could add several others.

 

I have zero doubt that pitch framing is a "thing".

 

While I think some of your examples would cancel out in sample size, there's no question other factors are at play. The biggest error one could make is jumping to the conclusion that these numbers definitely mean or are even trying to say "Joe Mauer is the worst". Heck, I'd wager that Sam Deduno alone is enough to make a catcher look bad at framing.

 

While pitcher skill would seem to be a big factor and there looks to be a general correlation, you can find some big differences between the chart above and MLB team ERA ranks -- Colorado, Miami, Houston. With all these factors at play, one can just hope that a day comes when we can accurately assign values to how each impact each other. While it's not with a great deal of accuracy, I do think we can look at trends over time and come to some conclusions on catcher framing skills.

[Marta Shearing]

Its not a coincidence diamond had his best start of the year with butera behind the plate.

[Willihammer]

I'd be interested in learning how you know that.

 

From http://www.sportvision.com/baseball/pitchfx:

 

[h=1]PITCHf/x[/h] The PITCHf/x service tracks and digitally records the full trajectory of live baseball pitches to within an inch of accuracy

[ThePuck]

Its not a coincidence diamond had his best start of the year with butera behind the plate.

 

Well, first, it wasn't his best start of the year...that was against Boston, in Boston and DOUMIT was his catcher. His 2nd best start, against Seattle...again with Doumit.

 

Are we going to argue DOUMIT is a better catcher than Mauer and Butera?

[jm3319]

From http://www.sportvision.com/baseball/pitchfx:

 

Okay cool, it tracks the trajectory accurately. That still tells me nothing about the strike zone. How'd they come up with their rectangle for a reference point? Is it based off the textbook definition of the strike zone (which i admittedly don't know off the top of my head), or is it an average, or is it just arbitrary for a reference point? Not trying to be snarky or overly critical, just trying to figure out how the trajectory is translated into strike or ball.

[jorgenswest]

Well, first, it wasn't his best start of the year...that was against Boston, in Boston and DOUMIT was his catcher. His 2nd best start, against Seattle...again with Doumit.

 

Are we going to argue DOUMIT is a better catcher than Mauer and Butera?

 

A catcher has the opportunity to use his skill to influence strike zone. These are the k/bb ratios for Diamond by catcher since 2011.

 

Mauer 3.0 (2.83 in 2013)

Butera 2.07

Doumit 1.47 (1.29 in 2013)

 

Hopefully the Twins will begin paying attention. Many teams are much further ahead of the curve.

 

The Pirates, Yankees, Dodgers, Rays and Diamondbacks have been very intentional about seeking catchers with good receiving skills even of it meant a significant drop in offensive production.

 

The Pirates shift from their 2011 catchers to 2013 catchers has had a dramatic effect on their pitching success. The Dodgers would prefer the offensively challenged Tim Federowicz over the much better hitting Ramon Hernandez.

[Willihammer]

Okay cool, it tracks the trajectory accurately. That still tells me nothing about the strike zone. How'd they come up with their rectangle for a reference point? Is it based off the textbook definition of the strike zone (which i admittedly don't know off the top of my head), or is it an average, or is it just arbitrary for a reference point? Not trying to be snarky or overly critical, just trying to figure out how the trajectory is translated into strike or ball.

In the case of baseballprospectus:

 

These strikezone maps are drawn to the specifications of Mike Fast, a former writer for Baseball Prospectus who now works for the Houston Astros. These plots show actual calls superimposed onto dashed lines that represent the strikezones that all Umpires generally call. The dashed lines shift to represent typical deviations for LHH and RHH.

 

BrooksBaseball.net: PITCHf/x Tool | Strikezone Maps

 

So to answer your question, yes, Dustin Pedroia is given the same zone as Big Papi, rightly or wrongly.

 

actually that's a bad example since Pedroia's RHH and Ortiz is a LHH, but you get the idea.

[Jim H]

As far as I understand, and I may not be understanding correctly, Pitch f/x also gives no depth to the strike zone. So the idea that it is accurate within one inch is clearly wrong on the face of it. Home plate is 16 inches deep, where the measurement is taken would clearly effect whether a moving pitch is considered a strike or not according to Pitch f/x.

[gil4]

Heck, I'd wager that Sam Deduno alone is enough to make a catcher look bad at framing.

 

That's a great line, both for being very funny and for illustrating the biggest weakness of the system that as yet to be ironed out (or maybe they have attempted it.) The umpire effect can be cancelled out with a larger sample size, but the pitcher effect is just amplified. For a pitch to be convincingly frames, it must be close to the strike zone and close to the target - it's hard to get the outside corner if the catcher is set up inside. Different speeds and different types of movement will cause variations, and if a catcher is catching 60% of his innings for 5 starters (or maybe 40% for 3 and a revolving door for the other two spots) it's going to be hard to cancel out results created by a certain type, experience level, or skill level of pitcher.

[jorgenswest]

Pitch f/x data is from a three dimensional strike zone.

 

Most graphics are 2 dimensional representation of that data.

[Guest USAFChief]

From http://www.sportvision.com/baseball/pitchfx:

That's the website of the company that sells and installs pitchf/x. Not surprisingly, they claim it's terrific.

 

AFAIK, there is no independent verification of anything they claim. There is really no way to verify anything about pitchf/x, for that matter. If you believe in technology, then I suppose it's reasonable to take that on faith.

 

But there is nothing but faith to prove that pitchf/x is more accurate than the umpires.

[Guest USAFChief]

Pitch f/x data is from a three dimensional strike zone.

 

Most graphics are 2 dimensional representation of that data.

 

I could be wrong, but I don't think that's true. As WH posted above, I don't even think the top and bottom of the zone is considered to be different for different hitters.

[Willihammer]

That's a great line, both for being very funny and for illustrating the biggest weakness of the system that as yet to be ironed out (or maybe they have attempted it.) The umpire effect can be cancelled out with a larger sample size, but the pitcher effect is just amplified.

 

That makes sense intuitively but I don't think its been the case in reality. As mentioned before, we've been studying this for going on 5 years or more. A lot of guys have changed teams, pitching staffs have turned over, but these findings remain pretty consistent.

 

Plus, think about it. If a guy is missing his spots so regularly, he's not going to be around to amplify any bias very much. In Deduno's case, he's hit his spots pretty well this year actually, thus he's still on the team and not in AAA.