There’s No Good Reason to Squeeze the Strike Zone

[Towny9]

You still don't get it. That is not how it works. To imply it does or expect it to work that shows your complete and utter bias.



Uggghhhhh! This is another thing that NEEDS TO STOP. Just because the next banger or borderline pitch goes the other way does not make it a "make up call." Knock it off already.

Y'all just prove my point that we should just throw the towel in and say the definition of strike should be "the pitches my pitcher throws", and the definition of ball should be "pitches the other team's pitcher throws."


Ehh, not exactly. While you are correct about the flaw of most ABS systems only measuring the ball at one 2-dimensional point in a 3-dimensional world, you are not correct that the system was "too good." The system sucked. It still sucks because MLB doesn't want to spend the money it takes to get it to "good." Right now, it is "adequate" for their wants and needs. If they want to sink the money in, the Eagle Eye system is the best they can do. They have been testing it. It does track the ball's path pretty accurately.

The other big flaw is they do not adjust it in real time for batters. They use either pre-programmed points (which is flawed) or league average points (even more flawed).

Currently, there are multiple possible interpretations of the hard data produced by MLB. The "TV box" is not accurate at all and is used for TV broadcasts. The raw data is the seemingly "real time" data produced on pitches. Then MLB processes the data to another standard and that is what is actually used in umpire grading. All of those still have a margin of error.

The strike zone is not a cube. It is a heptahedron. (I need to fix that in my earlier post. I erroneously called it a dodecahedron. I teach English, not math.)

We will have to agree to disagree on a lot of these. Go figure, a coach not agreeing with an umpire haha. The correction on the geometrical shape of the strike zone was a bit much - you know what I meant when I said cube. The back point of the plate is virtually irrelevant in calling balls and strikes. (And I do actually teach math)

 

[BrianTx01]

Local UICs seem to be doing the most umpire training. Quality varies greatly.

 

[The Man In Blue]

We will have to agree to disagree on a lot of these. Go figure, a coach not agreeing with an umpire haha. The correction on the geometrical shape of the strike zone was a bit much - you know what I meant when I said cube. The back point of the plate is virtually irrelevant in calling balls and strikes. (And I do actually teach math)

I do applaud you for teaching math! I did math remediation for 7th and 8th grade, but math was never my strong suit.

That back point does matter in 3-dimensions. If you have that high pitch that drops in just in time and clips the zone . . .

I guess we will agree to disagree. Sports accomplishments can have statistical probabilities, but they are not statistically balanced. If they were, every batter would bat .500.

 

[varefump]

Just tuning into this tread. Good discussion all around. I agree the armpit is too high, so my zone for good high school ball is six inches above the belt to the bottom of the kneecap. If I take six inches off the top, I need to add four inches at the bottom. Hitters can hit the pitch at the bottom of the knee (usually leading to ground balls and line drives vs popups in the upper zone).
I will make one correction to the Man in Blue... being a former Geometry teacher, the strike zone is actually a heptahedron (7 sides) and not a dodecahedron (12 sides).

 

[CoachJD]

I believe most umpires are socialist trying to equal things out. The faster and better pitcher gets a smaller zone.

This 100% happens and it absolutely annoys the hell out of me when it does. I've seen it quite a bit, including to the extent that one pitcher gets balls that bounce on/in front of the plate and the other pitcher has to quite literally throw it right down the middle (and even then it's 50/50).

If you feel the need to expand the zone a little because one team doesn't have pitching, you're cheating (yes, that is the correct word to use) if you don't expand it for both teams as close to equally as you can.

Also, I know this isn't most umps. There's a phenomenon around here that I've noticed in several girls sports (boys sports have something of a different effect) that I won't get into, but I'm certain why certain things get called certain ways.

 

[Sweet Lou]

Couldn't you easily make the counter argument that there is no good reason to expand the strike zone?

And while horizontally any part of the ball can touch the zone and be a strike, vertically the entire ball is supposed to be in the strike zone for it to be a strike.

The reality is most umpires shift the zone down at both the upper and lower ends of the zone. Whether that is good or not is debatable but from what I've seen over the years it's mostly reality.

 

[BucketDud]

Expecting umpires in amateur sports to be perfect when even the seasoned veterans of MLB make bad calls is silly. I will admit that I prefer a larger strike zone, up and down, but maybe that's the pitcher Dad in me coming out.

Enjoy these bad calls...

No doubt in my mind the challenge system is coming to MLB. Frankly I like it because prefer they get it right but also isn't every pitch.

If someone could design a relatively affordable and dependable strike/ball system for travel softball/baseball they would make a mint.

As a tournament director you take out the most controversial part of umpiring and now you only need one ump per game. It would be worth a lot of money to them over a season.