One beef I have with both Twins catchers last year was that they keep their catcher masks on when a throw is coming in from the outfield. They both wiffed on a few balls last year that I sure thought should have been caught. That should be an error on the catcher, but either no error was given or it went to the outfielder/relay person.

They must be coached to do this, but I don't like it. With the new rules about how a runner can slide I don't see a reason to keep a mask on and loose track of a ball (especially one that bounces). Otherwise we should hand out masks to the fielders at 2nd and 3rd as well.

When you watch a Suzuki and a Garver attempt to block a wild pitch it's pretty obvious that there is an enormous amount of difference in their ability to do so. I wasn't a huge Suzuki fan, but that guy could block the ball. His technique and his determination to square up to anything in the dirt was amazing. Garver likely lacks Suzukis natural quickness, and definitely lacks Kurts inherent ability to present a flat presence to a ball in the dirt. Garver came up to the Twins with some of the worst hands I have ever seen in a MLB catcher. He has improved in the last year, but still borders on "klunky"! I have no doubt that the extreme focus put on his pitch framing cause him to be locked into inflexible positions. One of which is the leg out position so as to lower his presence. The concept in and of itself is good, but the consequences can be more than one would prefer?

I think the most important skill will be calling a game. Catchers are in a unique position to see what pitches are effective and see better how a batter is responding to a pitch. They need the ability and skill to earn trust from a pitcher so they have confidence in the pitch they are throwing. They need to put in hours of study before each series watching video and learning the trends of hitters. Some will be able to utilize that data much better than others. This skill is more important than framing. Teams that do the best job of assessing this difficult skill to measure will add to their win total.

An automated strike zone may be further away from the majors than we think. Baseball Prospectus wrote about all of the hurdles before it can be a useful tool.

One of the hurdles that had me most concerned is setting the top and bottom of the strike zone. Every plate appearance has a unique top and bottom of the strike zone depending on the height and stance of a batter.

Right now two methods have been employed to determine the top and bottom of the zone.

“ PITCHf/x originally used poorly paid “stringers” to sit in a dark room under the stands and manually turn a dial to set the top and bottom of the zone on the video image of the batter. Saunders reports that Statcast uses the previous calls of major league umpires to build a database of the top and bottom of the strike zone for each hitter.”

The automated zone is a result of the previous calls from human umpires. What happens after a few years and the data of previous calls isn’t available for many batters? Do we go back to humans setting it before each pitch?

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/37347/robo-strike-zone-not-simple-think/

I have doubts that Garver will see the automated zone in his career. The Twins would be wise to continue teaching and seeking this skill.

An automated strike zone may be further away from the majors than we think. Baseball Prospectus wrote about all of the hurdles before it can be a useful tool.

One of the hurdles that had me most concerned is setting the top and bottom of the strike zone. Every plate appearance has a unique top and bottom of the strike zone depending on the height and stance of a batter.

Right now two methods have been employed to determine the top and bottom of the zone.

“ PITCHf/x originally used poorly paid “stringers” to sit in a dark room under the stands and manually turn a dial to set the top and bottom of the zone on the video image of the batter. Saunders reports that Statcast uses the previous calls of major league umpires to build a database of the top and bottom of the strike zone for each hitter.”

The automated zone is a result of the previous calls from human umpires. What happens after a few years and the data of previous calls isn’t available for many batters? Do we go back to humans setting it before each pitch?

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/37347/robo-strike-zone-not-simple-think/

I have doubts that Garver will see the automated zone in his career. The Twins would be wise to continue teaching and seeking this skill.

Very nice = thanks

I am surprised that there isn't "radio" between the dugout and catcher/pitcher. Instead of the catcher looking to the dugout sometimes for a pitch call.

Errors. Happens if a bad throw from the catcher to a base which allows for an advancement of the runner. The passed ball is essentially an error, but still not an error unless a runner scores. It's when the catcher looks to have control but misses the ball. Yes, don't understand why NOT just call it for what it is.

Boy, not only does a catcher have to know all about a batter (as should the pitcher), but ahs to work in conjunction with the pitcher for a throwing plan. And what happens when a new pitcher comes in? Which is why you see more and more catchers lined-up with specific rotation arms.

Imagine doing the squats of a catcher, having to watch the game thru a mask, keeping the arm in shape to throw back 140 times to the mound. The catcher throws more pitches, per say, than the pitcher in a game. Just doesn't need the speed or pinpoint control.

I can live with the electronic umpire. So the catcher doesn't have to play the games with their glove so much. Maybe eliminate some wild pitches and passed balls, too.

I am surprised that there isn't "radio" between the dugout and catcher/pitcher. Instead of the catcher looking to the dugout sometimes for a pitch call.

 

Errors. Happens if a bad throw from the catcher to a base which allows for an advancement of the runner. The passed ball is essentially an error, but still not an error unless a runner scores. It's when the catcher looks to have control but misses the ball. Yes, don't understand why NOT just call it for what it is.

 

Boy, not only does a catcher have to know all about a batter (as should the pitcher), but ahs to work in conjunction with the pitcher for a throwing plan. And what happens when a new pitcher comes in? Which is why you see more and more catchers lined-up with specific rotation arms.

 

Imagine doing the squats of a catcher, having to watch the game thru a mask, keeping the arm in shape to throw back 140 times to the mound. The catcher throws more pitches, per say, than the pitcher in a game. Just doesn't need the speed or pinpoint control.

 

I can live with the electronic umpire. So the catcher doesn't have to play the games with their glove so much. Maybe eliminate some wild pitches and passed balls, too.

Some really nice points - why don't more catchers have Tommy John surgery?  I would not want to be a catcher.