OU Vs UF WCWS Championship

[marriard]

I mean, no, it doesn't really. You'd have to be remarkably poor at receiving a pitch to affect every pitch. What you're saying is that every single called pitch is the opposite call of what it should be solely based on the catcher's receiving.

Not the opposite call on every pitch, but it can have a total effect. I --HATE-- fidgeting catchers. Stop moving. You have plenty of reach without having to leap 3 feet outside to catch a ball which is aimed at the edge of the plate. Umpires hate them as well - nothing like setting up for a pitch and the catcher leaps outside leaving nothing between you and the pitcher throwing 60+ mph. That is not a way to make friends.

My DD's catcher has been NECC/Catching Camp trained and she is a total joy to watch receive. Our other catcher is a moving mess which is slowly being fixed but is an uphill battle because of how she was taught (but she has a cannon for an arm which is why they like her)


If you want to see bad cacthing, watch the College Baseball World Series. There are some terrible, terrible catchers on some of these teams.

 

[djcarter1966]

I wouldn't use either of those.

But if you have strike zone data, you can see which catchers get more pitches out of the zone called strikes and vice versa. There would be some noise with different umpires having different zones (and having umpire data would be great to have here), but knowing Catcher A leads NCAA catchers in framing certainly would be useful.

Notice ESPN did not use the K zone technology; IMO umpires overall were not very good...beside some questionable calls my biggest beef is with the strike zone we appear to be back to anything batters box to batters box again which it seemed during the season was being called a little tighter...I'm sure pitchers are happy and given that runs are still being put up at a pretty good pace not much incentive to change...but still always hate that batter that is showing good plate discipline being punished. Granted a good hitter will adjust and expand their zone but then it means you are swings at pitches you can't drive well and are swinging at just so you don't strike out which is a change in mentality for hitter.

 

[Greenmonsters]

There is no reliable strike zone "data" at any level so when it is all said and done it is still based on subjective information. Becomes more opinion poll than objective stats. There far too many intangibles to try and quantify which catcher is better. Statistics are far more useful to those wearing pocket protectors as they drink a beer than those who actually make the decisions.

IMO the metrics are of some help, but aren't yet close to capturing the entire picture. Ask any pitcher whose scholarship or paycheck is tied to their performance who they want to pitch to and they'll pick the better catcher every time even if the other choice is their BFF or drinking buddy.

IME when trying to maximize the effectiveness of a multi-pitcher and two-catcher rotation, the better catcher usually gets paired with the wilder/more difficult to catch pitchers so the metrics can be misleading

 

[Eric F]

C'mon man, no one throws to 2nd on 1st and 3rd, give me a break.

Texas A&M did against UCLA. They got 2 outs out of it.

 

[Rocketech1]

Notice ESPN did not use the K zone technology; IMO umpires overall were not very good.

A couple of problems with the K Zone graphic is it doesn't change the height of the strike zone for different height batters, (top of knees to bottom of sternum for a 5'10" batter is going to be different than a 5'3" batter). The other problem is the graphic is two dimensional where the actual strike zone is three dimensional (i.e. has depth to it).

 

[90210]

Texas A&M did against UCLA. They got 2 outs out of it.

I wasn't being literal. I also see a people throw to 2nd and get 0 outs, and let runners score. The general consensus among the top teams from what I've seen is to hold the ball.

 

[djcarter1966]

A couple of problems with the K Zone graphic is it doesn't change the height of the strike zone for different height batters, (top of knees to bottom of sternum for a 5'10" batter is going to be different than a 5'3" batter). The other problem is the graphic is two dimensional where the actual strike zone is three dimensional (i.e. has depth to it).

But people are used to seeing it in MLB...people might not like MLB umps either but they are actually very consistent and usually do a pretty good job (again they are paid professionals) I just think the public would be surprised at how bad it is. In the LLWS everything is scrutinized too but everyone gives the umps a break because they are volunteers and rightly so.

 

[Eric F]

I wasn't being literal. I also see a people throw to 2nd and get 0 outs, and let runners score. The general consensus among the top teams from what I've seen is to hold the ball.

I know. We make teams pay for the throw to 2B on a regular basis.

 

[riseball]

I wasn't being literal. I also see a people throw to 2nd and get 0 outs, and let runners score. The general consensus among the top teams from what I've seen is to hold the ball.

Unless we are taking 10-14U if you cannot throw to 2nd and keep the run from scoring you are not a top team.

 

[Rocketech1]

But people are used to seeing it in MLB...people might not like MLB umps either but they are actually very consistent and usually do a pretty good job (again they are paid professionals) I just think the public would be surprised at how bad it is. In the LLWS everything is scrutinized too but everyone gives the umps a break because they are volunteers and rightly so.

IMO, as long as the umpire has a consistent strike zone for both teams, I don't really care too much if they miss their strike zone is slightly off. Pitchers (and batters) need to adjust to the zone being called that day. I also think the umpires pinched the strike zone for Game 2 after seeing all of the strikeouts (40) and low scoring, 17 inning Game 1. JMHO.