Article: Josmil Pinto and the Frame Game

[Parker Hageman]

Hoping to secure the role of backup catcher, Josmil Pinto realizes that he has areas of his game behind the plate he needed to work on. Earlier this week, we discussed his inability to control the run game. Another element of his defensive game -- the framing portion -- has also come under considerable criticism.

 

According to the catcher framing stat found at StatCorner.com, Pinto finished the 2015 season as a bottom-10 receiver. He was deficient at both getting out-of-zone pitches to be called strikes as well as from keeping in-zone pitches from being called balls. This fact did not go unnoticed by his pitching staff.

 

Is Pinto really that bad at framing as well?To begin, we really have to understand what we are talking about when it comes to “framing” and how Pinto would be good or bad at it. In a 2013 interview with Baseball Prospectus, former MLB umpire Jim McKean made an excellent observation about the practice.

 

“Everybody says, ‘Oh, he’s a good framer, he’s a bad framer,’ and that’s just an entertainment word. It’s just, he caught the ball correctly,” McKean said. “As long as the ball is received steadily with a strong hand, then it’s a lot easier to see the pitches. And every time they do that and they go ‘Oh, he’s a good framer,’ well, no, he’s just catching the pitch correctly. That’s just my interpretation. And I was in the big league for about 30 years, so I’ve seen all sorts of catching, and good catching will make it easier for umpires to call more strikes.”

 

From an umpire’s perspective that makes total sense. Little noise, little movement.

 

When Glen Perkins told 1500ESPN listeners that Pinto struggled with pitches below or at the bottom of the zone, his observations were correct. The rookie catcher finished 78 out of 79 catchers in getting low pitches called strikes and the two examples below show why some of it is on him and some is on his pitcher.

 

In this example, Pinto calls for a 3-2 fastball on the outer-half from reliever Casey Fien. Fien obliges and throws heat that clips a hair of the corner:

 

Download attachment: Pinto_PitcherEx2.png

 

Though by definition a strike, the umpire says it is a ball.

 

Part of it might be on where Pinto caught it (see below) as well as the positioning of the umpire. In the interview with Baseball Prospectus, McKean said that the umpire’s positioning can put some areas of the strike zone in a blind spot. Like in the instance below, if he’s lined up on the inside of a hitter, the outer portion of the zone might be harder to track. In that situation, a catcher’s ability to receive the pitch correctly can mean the difference between a ball and a strike.

 

Download attachment: Pinto_Ball_9.5-2ex-Caught.png

There are various reasons why a pitch’s outcome is considered a ball when it was actually in the zone. Believe it or not, some of it actually has to do with the pitcher as well. For example, while catching a Ricky Nolasco start against the Angels in early September, Pinto sets up on the outer-half calling for a slider. Nolasco misses his spot but manages to throw a decent slider that nicks the inside edge of the plate.

 

 

Download attachment: Pinto_PitcherEx.png

Data shows that the pitch crossed a portion of the plate -- albeit not by much. Still, Pinto is forced to shift back towards the inside and his reception of the ball does not do Nolasco any favors.

 

“[T]he problem you run into is, when a catcher moves out there, you move out there a little bit with him,” said McKean. “Then they throw the ball inside, and it’s in the strike zone, and it looks like he’s diving to catch it. And that’s very difficult to call a strike on. You can do it, and most of the time the hitter’s going to look at you and say, ‘Jimmy, how can that be a strike? He’s diving back to catch it.’”

 

While the umpire in this situation did not shift to the outside with Pinto, everything else mirrored what McKean described. Given the scenario it is hard to assign total blame on the catcher, yet the framing statistic would demerit Pinto in this instance.

 

Download attachment: Pinto_Ball_9.5-Caught.png

One takeaway about this pitch is that Pinto does not receive it that poorly. Yes, he tries to pull his glove up after catching the pitch but as McKean told Baseball Prospectus, catchers who fail to catch low pitches palm up (as seen in the image above) often will have that particular pitch called against them. In that regard, Pinto is probably not as technically bad as the Marlins’ Jarrod Saltalamacchia. The 29-year-old backstop earned the dubious honors of being the worst receiving catcher in 2014 based on the StatCorner.com’s pitch framing statistic (24.4 runs below average).

 

Here is an example as to why he brings up the rear of the list. On a 3-2 count, his pitcher brings a knee-high strike which should end the at-bat in the Marlins’ favor. It is called a ball.

 

Download attachment: Salty_Pitch.png

 

Admittedly, the 95-mile per hour fastball has some sink to it, running the pitch back towards the Dodgers’ Yasiel Puig but rather than grabbing it palm up, Saltalamacchia catches it, well, like this:

 

Download attachment: Salty_Ball_Caught.png

In this case, it is hard not to wonder whether if a different catcher had caught this middle-zone/knee-high pitch with minimal movement i it would have been called a strike.

 

Let’s review another scenario. The New York Mets’ Travis d’Arnaud was considered one of game’s better receivers and well liked by his staff. "When the balls are down, he does something that makes them look like they're strikes," said the Mets’ Zack Wheeler in 2013. "It's ridiculous. I had a couple that I threw and I knew they were balls, but they looked like strikes after he framed them up."

 

How ridiculous can he be? Take a look at the location of this pitch.

 

Download attachment: dArnaud_Pitch.png

 

There are several reasons that could explain why the umpire chose to expand his zone regardless of d’Anuard’s efforts. For starters, the Mets had just walked two batters in a row with the bases loaded. While umpires try to stay in the confines of the strike zone, they too are human and want to have the game end in under 17 hours.

 

D'Anuard also caught the ball with minimal movement but his pitcher also hit his target making the reception less of a challenge than what Pinto and Saltalamacchia faced.

 

Download attachment: dArnaud_Strike_Caught.png

 

According to StatCorner.com, the Twins’ Kurt Suzuki remains one of the game’s worst framers as well. For whatever reason, Suzuki is unable to convince umpires that borderline pitches are strikes. That is, until two-strike situations. Whereas the average catcher was able to get a called strike on 3.7% of all out-of-zone takes with two-strikes, Suzuki coaxed strike three looking at a 5% clip -- only behind Boston’s David Ross and the Dodgers’ A.J. Ellis in that situation.

 

Seems like that should count for a little bit more than a first-pitch strike. That said, Suzuki’s magic may simply be the skill of pitcher Phil Hughes. Hughes had a whopping 12% called strike rate on pitches out of the strike zone when there were two strikes. His cutter became an outstanding weapon that he deployed on left-handed hitters as such:

 

 

http://i.imgur.com/hUtvBWn.gif

 

Despite going around the plate, Hughes hit his target. Suzuki will receive positive points for framing even though the bulk of the work is done by Hughes’ pitching.

 

“What a pitcher does has a lot to do with it,” Suzuki told me last spring training. “If he’s all over the place, he’s obviously not going to get those borderline calls, no matter how good you make it look. If you are around the plate consistently, you are going to get those calls. There’s definitely an art to it, you look at the Molinas, they are pretty good at what they do.”

 

As McKean noted, the art of framing is actually the art of catching properly. In this context, Pinto has some work to do to become a better all-around defensive catcher. Umpires cannot be robots. The current catcher framing measurement system has plenty of flaws that give credit and punish receivers for mistakes of their pitchers. Umpires are influenced by reactions around them, positioning and because of biases. In a 3-0 count, a pitch out of the strike zone is likely to be called a strike 17% while a 0-2 pitch is likely to be called a ball 39% of the time. Until statisticians can factor in targeting and weigh the counts properly, catcher framing stats will remain imperfect.

 

Click here to view the article

[High heat]

The more I read the more I watch pinto the less I think he can be a big league catcher. Doesn't hit well unless given consistent ABs, doesn't throw out runners, doesn't call a good game and doesn't frame well. Anyone else like watching Hermann behind the plate? His swing looks solid but hasn't put anything together at the big league lvl. Perfect backup catcher. Hits left handed and can play multiple other positions. Thoughts?

[daanderson20]

Conclusion: Robot umpires. It's time.

[nytwinsfan]

The more I read the more I watch pinto the less I think he can be a big league catcher. Doesn't hit well unless given consistent ABs, doesn't throw out runners, doesn't call a good game and doesn't frame well. Anyone else like watching Hermann behind the plate? His swing looks solid but hasn't put anything together at the big league lvl. Perfect backup catcher. Hits left handed and can play multiple other positions. Thoughts?

I think it is way too early to say that, and I think part of the point of Parker's two articles with regard to defense were that Pinto (1) is not as bad as he seems, and (2)  to the extent he is below average, there is potential for improvement. As for his bat, I think it will be fine. His bat has been above average for a catcher, even if you just look at last year. I also think he is likely to improve on last year's adequate .705 OPS going forward.

[Willihammer]

It looks like D'Arnaud's body, particularly his shoulders, are angled open toward the umpire. Whereas in several of those pics Pinto's shoulders are angled almost 90 degrees the other way. Maybe that's also impairing the ump's line of sight?

[Parker Hageman]

It looks like D'Arnaud's body, particularly his shoulders, are angled open toward the umpire. Whereas in several of those pics Pinto's shoulders are angled almost 90 degrees the other way. Maybe that's also impairing the ump's line of sight?

 

 

Catchers have said that this is actually a trait that helps in getting more calls. 

 

From the Brewers' Jonathan Lucroy:

 

“If you scoot to one side of the plate and turn your body a little, the more the umpire can see, and the more the umpire can see over your shoulder, the more likely he’s going to give you that pitch because he can see it better.” 

 

 

And the Astros' Jason Castro:

 

“That’s part of what I’ve integrated into my catching this year is thinking about the angles in which I set up, and I actually have noticed a difference in the rising number of called strikes we’ve gotten this year, in just a non-scientific approach to it.”

 

 

In the particular case of Pinto above, I think that the pitch locations are causing his angles in how he receives it. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised to see in video that he is not angling like Castro/Lucroy/d'Arnuad in those situations.

[daanderson20]

Along with his shoulder angles and opening up to the ump, it looks like D'Araud keeps his body tall. His shoulders stay the same height while his glove hand goes down to catch the ball. Pinto's entire frame lowers when he goes for the low strikes.

[Parker Hageman]

Along with his shoulder angles and opening up to the ump, it looks like D'Araud keeps his body tall. His shoulders stay the same height while his glove hand goes down to catch the ball. Pinto's entire frame lowers when he goes for the low strikes.

 

 

I don't think the comparison should be between these two instances. The real separation is that d'Arnuad's pitcher hit his target. Same goes with Suzuki's strike. Pinto's movement (lowering and lunging) doesn't do his pitcher any favors but the fact is the pitcher missed his target. A better test would be to see how Pinto receives the same pitch in the same position as d'Arnuad or vice versa.  

 

Other than that... #RobotUmpiresNow. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

Conclusion: Robot umpires. It's time.

I was going to say something like this. The mere fact we are debating a statistic on the catchers ability to assist an umpire in getting a call right (or getting a few extra strikes for that matter) tells me we need to automate balls and strikes. The technology is there. Just do it.

[Parker Hageman]

I was going to say something like this. The mere fact we are debating a statistic on the catchers ability to assist an umpire in getting a call right (or getting a few extra strikes for that matter) tells me we need to automate balls and strikes. The technology is there. Just do it.

 

 

Catchers are worthless pieces of skin anyway. I say Robot Umpires and a giant ratty old mattress behind the plate to stop the pitch. Who's with me?

[daanderson20]

I don't think the comparison should be between these two instances. The real separation is that d'Arnuad's pitcher hit his target. Same goes with Suzuki's strike. Pinto's movement (lowering and lunging) doesn't do his pitcher any favors but the fact is the pitcher missed his target. A better test would be to see how Pinto receives the same pitch in the same position as d'Arnuad or vice versa.  

 

Other than that... #RobotUmpiresNow. 

Well then I wish you had written a different article or used different #pictures.

[Parker Hageman]

Well then I wish you had written a different article or used different #pictures.

 

 

We highly encourage dissatisfied readers to do the research and post a blog themselves.

[Parker Hageman]

Speaking towards the point I made about refining the catcher framing statistics, there was apparently a study conducted by Baseball Info Solutions for the Sloan Sports Conference which added some of the elements like counts, pitchers, command, etc. The entire gory study is found here (http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/SSAC15-RP-Finalist-Who-is-responsible-for-a-called-strike.pdf) but the biggest takeaway is that even with all the filters applied Kurt Suzuki was still one of the worst framers in baseball last year.

[Dave T]

Just a well-done article, Parker.  I learned a lot, as usual.  Thanks!

[bholmgren]

I showed my 11yo son the differences.  Hoping he can put the d'Arnaud tactics to use this summer

[Toolie]

This is an informative and insightful piece, as usual, Parker.  Thanks.

 

I would think framing would be a very teachable skill.  Ongoing analysis like this will help identify useful techniques until we have consensus on "good framing" and "bad framing" approaches.    

[Platoon]

If you have umpired, it is easier to understand the difference that the catchers reception of the ball makes. For example, for a horderline ball at the knees, if you catch it with a downward motion, it's going to look lower. If you catch it palm up, you are showing the ump a lot of ball. Same goes for the corners, especially the outside one. Also, you do want to catch the ball with as little movement as possible. Grasping at it does no good. As for "pulling" a pitch? If you have to pull it, maybe it wasn't a strike? . It is also a lot easier to call a game over a catcher who sits low. Pinto looks like he has his butt too high in the air. Get low, and work up. Catch that wide breaking ball closer to the plate. Framing is simply helping the guy behind you get a good look, and helping him look good doing his job. It truly is not rocket science.

[ashbury]

Catchers are worthless pieces of skin anyway. I say Robot Umpires and a giant ratty old mattress behind the plate to stop the pitch. Who's with me?

This, and I'll go you one better. Mr Clanky batting against Iron Mike.

 

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0Hr1c2rcn9o/hqdefault.jpg

http://www.frozenropes.com/Uploads/Gallery/NY%20-%20Albany/iron_mike.jpg

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

It looks like D'Arnaud's body, particularly his shoulders, are angled open toward the umpire. Whereas in several of those pics Pinto's shoulders are angled almost 90 degrees the other way. Maybe that's also impairing the ump's line of sight?

 

You are right. It doesn't look like Pinto knows where home plate is.

[Linus]

While I hope Pinto succeeds, he really hasn't proven anything with the glove or the bat.

He gets lots of love on these boards but I think the "never make it" potential here is pretty high.

[jorgenswest]

There is little evidence the Twins value framing data or the skill and technique related to framing pitches. You only have to look at the signing of Doumit, the extending of Doumit, the signing of Suzuki and the extending of Suzuki as evidence.

 

Pinto has been trained in the organization since 2006. Despite 9 years, he enters 2015 with very poor technique and skill particularly in the area of framing. He is still young enough to improve his skill, but it doesn't seem likely the Twins can help him. It is hard to have any confidence in the organization's ability to develop or even recognize a catcher's ability to frame pitches. Let's hope the other clubs are wrong and this skill has little effect on runs given up.

Edited March 7, 2015 by jorgenswest

[Paul]

One thing you didn't mention, and one I've never seen mentioned on this site, is the catcher's ability to to catch a borderline pitch with the center of the pocket over the plate. This means: recognizing the pitch is off slightly, holding the glove with the center of the pocket over the corner or edge of the strike zone, letting the pitch hit the little finger, heel or thumb of the glove and deflect into the pocket, doing this with enough strength the the glove doesn't rock too badly giving away what you did.  I don't recall seeing this kid catch but Mauer was excellent at this.  All the best catchers do this.  The lesser ones not so much.

[jay]

Speaking towards the point I made about refining the catcher framing statistics, there was apparently a study conducted by Baseball Info Solutions for the Sloan Sports Conference which added some of the elements like counts, pitchers, command, etc. The entire gory study is found here (http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/SSAC15-RP-Finalist-Who-is-responsible-for-a-called-strike.pdf) but the biggest takeaway is that even with all the filters applied Kurt Suzuki was still one of the worst framers in baseball last year.

Take a look at the work that Baseball Prospectus has done. Their framing statistics are adjusted for all the things you've mentioned here and more -- the count, the pitcher, the umpire, pitch type and a regression to the mean.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=22934

 

Yes, both Pinto and Suzuki were really bad at framing last year. Suzuki was 2nd to last behind Salty (out of 105). Pinto was way up at 93rd.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1667334

 

Note that page also has some blocking statistics where Suzuki deserves a little credit as being 7th best.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

There is little evidence the Twins value framing data or the skill and technique related to framing pitches. You only have to look at the signing of Doumit, the extending of Doumit, the signing of Suzuki and the extending of Suzuki as evidence.

Pinto has been trained in the organization since 2006. Despite 9 years, he enters 2015 with very poor technique and skill particularly in the area of framing. He is still young enough to improve his skill, but it doesn't seem likely the Twins can help him. It is hard to have any confidence in the organization's ability to develop or even recognize a catcher's ability to frame pitches. Let's hope the other clubs are wrong and this skill has little effect on runs given up.

i started out refuting this with "yeah, but Joe Mauer" but then I recalled Parker's advice, and found this http://www.hardballtimes.com/the-state-and-future-of-pitch-framing-research/

Turns out Joe was middle of the pack as a catcher. So I changed my tune. TR has been quoted dozens of times saying he doesn't value pitch framing metrics, turns out he doesn't show evidence of valuing catcher skill either.

 

[jay]

Any one know of a study that correlates xFIP-ERA to framing and/or defense in general?

 

I'd be curious to know if and how much we could point to framing or defense as the root cause for the difference between a pitcher's expected results (xFIP) and actual results (ERA). Relevant to all of our chatter about the outfield defense as well.

[jorgenswest]

Any one know of a study that correlates xFIP-ERA to framing and/or defense in general?

I'd be curious to know if and how much we could point to framing or defense as the root cause for the difference between a pitcher's expected results (xFIP) and actual results (ERA). Relevant to all of our chatter about the outfield defense as well.

Framing would effect balls and strikes and therefore be considered defense independent. A pitcher's FIP and xFIP are based heavily on strike outs and walks so any change in those numbers due to framing would result in a pitcher's FIP or xFIP that didn't represent his true abilities. Framing has significant impact on those measures.

 

Outfield defense would have no impact on xFIP and little on FIP unless there was some superman effort in stealing home runs therefore resulting in a lower than expected FIP.

[jay]

Framing would effect balls and strikes and therefore be considered defense independent. A pitcher's FIP and xFIP are based heavily on strike outs and walks so any change in those numbers due to framing would result in a pitcher's FIP or xFIP that didn't represent his true abilities. Framing has significant impact on those measures.

 

Outfield defense would have no impact on xFIP and little on FIP unless there was some superman effort in stealing home runs therefore resulting in a lower than expected FIP.

Fair point on the first one. Is there a known way to adjust xFIP for framing? The Twins pitchers underperformed to their collective xFIP as it was and that's basically saying their xFIP should have been even better due to the fewer strikes/strikeouts and more walks with the framing they got.

 

The second one still seems relevant. It's not defense impact on xFIP, it's defense impact on xFIP minus ERA. So, how much of that difference is attributable / correlated to defense and how much is luck (ie LOB%) or something else.

[Willihammer]

I've never seen a study that's broken down the xFIP-ERA gap into batted ball components and defensive components. Its possible, but unlikely, that 100% of the Twins xFIP-ERA gap was caused by extreme batted ball luck.

 

Actually not 100%. xFIP is regressed across all of baseball so AL pitchers will have slightly higher ERAs than xFIPs on average. Its also not park-adjusted and TF appears to be somewhat of a hitters park.