I read this piece and was quite excited to do so as I am greatly interested in understanding the concept of pitch framing.

 

http://www.twinkietown.com/2017/4/9/15222762/pitch-framing-jason-castro-salvador-perez-best-catchers-minnesota-twins-kansas-city-royals-mlb

 

As I started reading the article I thought it was going to be amazing, the perspectives on Perez were going to really translate into strikes for the Twins. But, I am very disappointed. Granted, Perez is not a "quiet" receiver. However the writer compared Perez's bottom of the strike zone to the top of Castro's.  If you compare the bottom of both catcher's strike plot you see a host of green diamonds.  The ump was not giving strikes at very bottom edge of the strike zone, but he was at the top for both catchers/pitchers.  

 

My conclusion, not sure if I am right or wrong, is that Rob Drake (the ump) had a very consistent strike zone for both teams and, Castro is a more quiet receiver than Perez, but I am not sure if he added many strikes.  Can some help me understand this better?

 

Castro is a more quiet receiver than Perez, but I am not sure if he added many strikes.

A lot to tackle here so I'll start with this statement. Framing isn't about adding tens of strikes per game. The difference between the best and worst receiver tops out around 4-ish calls per game (going from memory here so I could be off a call or two). Most of the time, the difference will be a couple of calls, no more.

 

But that's immensely valuable. Imagine going 1-2 on a batter instead of 2-1. If you do that just once a game, your likelihood of getting that guy out raises quite a bit. Do that twice and you've given your team a better chance at winning the game. At that point, the catcher has made a substantive contribution to recording two outs simply through receiving the ball cleanly.

 

But, I am very disappointed. Granted, Perez is not a "quiet" receiver. However the writer compared Perez's bottom of the strike zone to the top of Castro's.  If you compare the bottom of both catcher's strike plot you see a host of green diamonds.  The ump was not giving strikes at very bottom edge of the strike zone, but he was at the top for both catchers/pitchers.

I didn't view the article as a 1:1 trade of strike/ball calls. Yes, the ump had a relatively consistent strike zone but I believe the point of the article - at least the way I read it - was to illustrate the difference in receiving styles. Perez was all over the place, giving away potential strike calls by jerking his glove at the last moment. Castro, on the other hand, was smoothly receiving the ball and giving the ump a good look at the pitch. Sometimes, that will still net the catcher an undesirable call from the umpire... But a few times a game, the ump will see that smooth receipt of the pitch and give the catcher a strike call.

 

Again, it only happens a few times a game. Framing isn't about "tricking" the umpire and it's far from 100% consistent. All the catcher can do is give the umpire the best look possible, avoid jerky transitions, and try to get that strike call a few additional times per game.

Magnets

From my understanding of framing - which is more abstract, as I was never a catcher - this is just about the perfect example of framing.

 

https://streamable.com/izvec

 

Castro sets up on the far edge of the plate. As the pitch is delivered, he smoothly moves his glove outside the zone. As the pitch is tailing back in toward the batter, he - again, smoothly - begins moving his glove back toward the zone. Castro is positioned perfectly and it appears he's receiving exactly the pitch he called. The pitch tails to the black. At that point, it's anyone's guess whether it's a strike or ball. But because Castro is moving his glove toward the zone, where the ump sees the glove stop is well within the strike zone.

 

Strike.

 

Was that pitch a strike? Ooh boy, dunno. It's a borderline call for sure... But Castro, through his receiving, made it nearly a guaranteed strike.

I think this provides a lot of comparative relevance. It references several tables, notice past Twins catchers are at the bottom of the list.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=23503

 

I think the importance here is valuing a strike in terms of predictive runs scored. Entire seasons of high pitch framing values gives improved probabilities for fewer runs scored.

Edited April 11, 20179 yr by Sconnie

 

From my understanding of framing - which is more abstract, as I was never a catcher - this is just about the perfect example of framing.

 

https://streamable.com/izvec

 

Had himself positioned well off the center of the plate, minimizing amount of body and/or arm movement required to receive the pitch, as well as giving a nice visual lane for the umpire to see.

 

I think this provides a lot of comparative relevance. It references several tables, notice past Twins catchers are at the bottom of the list.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=23503

I think the importance here is valuing a strike in terms of predictive runs scored. Entire seasons of high pitch framing values gives improved probabilities for fewer runs scored.

 

I think you said it right.  Improved probabilities.  So I am behind the concept 100% but the bottom line is that we will all struggle to see the impact of pitch framing as we watch games, but ultimately it will show up in statistics over the long haul.  Statistics, mind you,  that probably have a margin of error equal to the potential positive impact of "pitch framing".  

 

BUT, the media and probably whomever from the Twins organization is feeding this frenzy, has blown the importance of pitch framing way out of proportion.  Castro has said this too.  

 

Jason Castro has been one of the top pitch framers year in and year out and the catchers at the top seem to be consistently at the top so the skill seems to be repeatable. 

 

Based on that... I really can't dismiss pitch framing like I want to. 

 

However... I will cling to the shoadow of a doubt caused by CERA. The top pitch framing guys are often not leading their own team in CERA. Gattis had a better CERA that Castro did last year. I still believe that CERA and Pitch Framing need to go hand in hand.

 

 

 

 

 

 

However... I will cling to the shoadow of a doubt caused by CERA. The top pitch framing guys are often not leading their own team in CERA. Gattis had a better CERA that Castro did last year. I still believe that CERA and Pitch Framing need to go hand in hand.

You're basically just expressing the misgivings about CERA that to my knowledge have always dogged that stat. The guy with the best CERA on the team stands about a 50-50 chance to not be the best next year, with no change in personnel, the last time I looked at a writeup.

 

Of course framing is also still somewhat of a fuzzy concept to pin down analytically. So, it's not much surprise if the intersection of the two isn't satisfying.

 

You're basically just expressing the misgivings about CERA that to my knowledge have always dogged that stat. The guy with the best CERA on the team stands about a 50-50 chance to not be the best next year, with no change in personnel, the last time I looked at a writeup.

 

Of course framing is also still somewhat of a fuzzy concept to pin down analytically. So, it's not much surprise if the intersection of the two isn't satisfying.

Yeah, there is still a lot to learn about framing but requiring it to align with CERA - which is wildly inconsistent and generally regarded as a bad statistical measure of a player - is asking framing to correlate with a stat we already know is flawed.

 

We should be asking why CERA isn't a good indicator of catching prowess, not why framing doesn't align with a stat we believe to be broken (and was believed to be broken before sabr people came around at all, really).

 

I read this piece and was quite excited to do so as I am greatly interested in understanding the concept of pitch framing.

 

http://www.twinkietown.com/2017/4/9/15222762/pitch-framing-jason-castro-salvador-perez-best-catchers-minnesota-twins-kansas-city-royals-mlb

 

As I started reading the article I thought it was going to be amazing, the perspectives on Perez were going to really translate into strikes for the Twins. But, I am very disappointed. Granted, Perez is not a "quiet" receiver. However the writer compared Perez's bottom of the strike zone to the top of Castro's.  If you compare the bottom of both catcher's strike plot you see a host of green diamonds.  The ump was not giving strikes at very bottom edge of the strike zone, but he was at the top for both catchers/pitchers.  

 

My conclusion, not sure if I am right or wrong, is that Rob Drake (the ump) had a very consistent strike zone for both teams and, Castro is a more quiet receiver than Perez, but I am not sure if he added many strikes.  Can some help me understand this better?

 

Was kind of my assessment of that article as well. Castro is better at the "receiving" part of catching. Perez has always been known for his athleticism and arm behind the plate, not necessarily that part.

 

I think you would do better to look at Baseball Prospectus's use of the stat WARP. Similar to WAR, but also does a lot more things with defensive calculations (I think that's the right stat I'm thinking of, someone correct me if I'm wrong).

 

The case I look at is Yasmani Grandal from last year, a great pitch framer who hit .228/.339/.477 (a weird line bouyed by spike in HR's). Baseball Reference gave him 2.8 WAR for the season, Fangraphs gave him 2.9. Among catchers with 400+ Plate Appearances that WAR value was the 5th best mark in baseball last year (per fangraphs). They gave Salvador Perez 2.7 and 2.2, respectively.

 

You go to Baseball Prospectus, and Grandal's WARP for the season was 6.6, 11th best in all of baseball at ANY position, and only Buster Posey ahead of him as a Catcher (because Posey is a far better hitter). That's an immense difference, and is how much value some think this skill is able to provide to a team (Salvador Perez's WARP, was just 0.77 in comparison, Jason Castro was 2.4).

 

You're basically just expressing the misgivings about CERA that to my knowledge have always dogged that stat. The guy with the best CERA on the team stands about a 50-50 chance to not be the best next year, with no change in personnel, the last time I looked at a writeup.

 

Of course framing is also still somewhat of a fuzzy concept to pin down analytically. So, it's not much surprise if the intersection of the two isn't satisfying.

 

Yeah... I agree

 

However... Since I'm at the point where I can see the repeat-ability of Pitch Framing. It's not only natural to try and find some kind of quantified value that makes it make sense. 

 

CERA is just a natural place to look. I'm only willing to compare and contrast 2 catchers working with the same pitching staff. 

 

 

If Castro is good at it... Also reportedly a good game caller.

If Gattis is not as good at it and also reportedly a poor defensive catcher. 

 

Seeing that the Houston Staff performed better with Gattis behind the plate just makes me pause. I do have that grain of salt handy and not far away.