Automating the strike zone

[bschoolprof 6281]

The Atlantic League tried it out for their all star game.  Seemed to work out ok.  Thoughts?

Quote

YORK, Pa. — Professional baseball allowed a glimpse at its future here Wednesday night for keen-eyed observers of the home plate umpire’s right ear and back pocket.

A computer officially called balls and strikes for the first time in the game’s history in the United States at a minor league all-star game. Major League Baseball in February inked a three-year agreement with the independent, eight-team Atlantic League to install experimental rules in line with Commissioner Rob Manfred’s vision for a faster, more action-packed game.

Among the first changes discussed was an automated balls and strikes regime, run via a panel above home plate made by sports data firm Trackman. After a half-season of testing, the system was ready for the league All-Star Game, debuting with great fanfare and an unambiguous strike.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/07/11/robot-ump-calls-first-professional-game-with-one-hitch-no-controversy/?utm_term=.8cf9f4cb1ef4

Quote

YORK, Pa. — During the second inning of Wednesday night’s Atlantic League All-Star Game, Joe Van Meter’s two-strike fastball to Joey Terdoslavich sunk low into the catcher’s mitt and was caught just barely above the ground. The pitch looked low not only to the hitter but also to the umpire, who nevertheless signaled strike three—but it wasn’t exactly his call.

Terdoslavich did a double take, glancing back at home-plate umpire Brian deBrauwere with a look of disbelief. deBrauwere, however, merely pointed to the AirPod in his right ear, his way of reminding the batter that the call came from TrackMan, the 3-D Doppler radar hanging from the roof of the ballpark. At that, Terdoslavich returned to the dugout, unable to advance his argument against an inanimate object.

In the official debut of an MLB-sanctioned automated strike zone, controversy was avoided with no egregious errors and few challenged calls.

“I didn’t really hear any complaining from anybody. If that [low strike] was the one blunder—because I know it was low, I just know it was—but if that was the one blunder, was it 99.9% [correct] then?” said Terdoslavich, who played parts of three seasons with the Atlanta Braves from 2013-15, before adding: “It ran better than I thought it would.”

https://www.sporttechie.com/mlb-umpire-automated-strike-zone-abs-atlantic-league-all-star-game/

[Beau Vine 55027]

Can't happen soon enough. 

 

GTFO, Angel:

imgur

/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />

Edited July 11, 2019 by Beau Vine

[Huckleberry 33676]

The article just tells us what we already know. Human umpires call too many wide pitches strikes and not enough high/low pitches strikes. I also can't wait for this.

[NeverMarryAStripper 22054]

Will they program in the actual strike zone that’s defined in the rules or the bullshit one that gets called. Also, how many games will it take for hackers to crack the system and sell ball/strike calls to gamblers

[bschoolprof 6281]

The first question is a good one.  I can't find too much online about what they actually did for this game, but I think if implemented, it's going to have to be a standardized zone like it is on TV, not customized like it's implied in the rule book. That hurts guys like altuve and helps guys like judge.  

[Huckleberry 33676]

One of the articles mentioned they used biometric data for players who had played in the league before. It's not that hard.

What it will screw is guys like Jeff Bagwell unless they measure the strike zone the right way instead of just basing it on height. Within a decade it will probably be possible to set the strike zone when a guy gets into his stance, which is the right way to do it.

[miguelito 11347]

[F250 28990]

2 hours ago, bschoolprof said:

The Atlantic League tried it out for their all star game.  Seemed to work out ok.  Thoughts?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/07/11/robot-ump-calls-first-professional-game-with-one-hitch-no-controversy/?utm_term=.8cf9f4cb1ef4

https://www.sporttechie.com/mlb-umpire-automated-strike-zone-abs-atlantic-league-all-star-game/

I'm cool with the automated strike zone, it will likely improve the game by providing consistency.

I think the mound moving back will be a lot more controversial than an automated umpire.

"The league originally announced plans to push the pitcher’s mound back two feet, but delayed the proposal at least a season after an uproar from players and coaches."

[pepper brooks 580]

I am all for this 100%.  They have the ability to get this right at an almost 100% rate.  Not even the very best human umpires can get close to that.  As a former tall player who often got wrung up on pitches mid shin and away, I welcome anything that makes this more accurate.    Would love to see the high strike called more, and the low strike actually be within the stated range rather than mid shin.  

[pepper brooks 580]

I am not a fan of moving the mound back.  I might be interested in seeing a study of splitting the difference on the mound, i.e. move it back one foot, BUT raise it back up a few inches too.  that might be interesting to see in a test case.  

[Guadaloopy 11077]

The discussion of moving the mound has to be the most ridiculous idea for a rule change I have ever heard. After an initial 40 years or so of trial and error,  it’s been set at 60’ 6” since 1893.   Mess with mound height, but don’t change one of the most fundamental dimensions in the game.   

The documentary “Fastball” has a great discussion of how 60’ 6” is right at the combined threshold of two human capabilities- 1) the speed at which a human being can throw a baseball and 2) the human brain’s ability to detect and react in time to hit a ball thrown at that speed.   

[Huckleberry 33676]

Mound move is dumb. Just fucking deaden the ball you morons. Deader ball, lower seams. More contact, fewer strikeouts, fewer walks will result as pitchers don't fear bombs as much.

[El Diablo 4232]

9 minutes ago, Guadaloopy said:

The discussion of moving the mound has to be the most ridiculous idea for a rule change I have ever heard. After an initial 40 years or so of trial and error,  it’s been set at 60’ 6” since 1893.   Mess with mound height, but don’t change one of the most fundamental dimensions in the game.   

The documentary “Fastball” has a great discussion of how 60’ 6” is right at the combined threshold of two human capabilities- 1) the speed at which a human being can throw a baseball and 2) the human brain’s ability to detect and react in time to hit a ball thrown at that speed.   

Throwing speeds have increased, but you're right - the current distance was based on those criteria which were established in a different era.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

This has been a long time coming. Someone on surly was trying to tell me the technology isn’t in place, but that didn’t really make sense to me. Just get the call right. Even if it drastically changes the strike zone in the hitters eyes (even if it’s from game to game), it’s going to be consistent all game, no matter what. 

[Beau Vine 55027]

25 minutes ago, Guadaloopy said:

The discussion of moving the mound has to be the most ridiculous idea for a rule change I have ever heard. After an initial 40 years or so of trial and error,  it’s been set at 60’ 6” since 1893.   Mess with mound height, but don’t change one of the most fundamental dimensions in the game.   

The documentary “Fastball” has a great discussion of how 60’ 6” is right at the combined threshold of two human capabilities- 1) the speed at which a human being can throw a baseball and 2) the human brain’s ability to detect and react in time to hit a ball thrown at that speed.   

It has always bothered my OCD that the rubber is not directly in the center of the diamond.  I think I calculated that about 2 feet back would put it there. 

[Huckleberry 33676]

5 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

It has always bothered my OCD that the rubber is not directly in the center of the diamond.  I think I calculated that about 2 feet back would put it there. 

SQRT(90^2+90^2)/2 = 63.64 ~ 63'7-5/8"

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

i like framing as a skill, so i don't like automated strike zone idea.

[Huckleberry 33676]

Yeah, that's about the worst argument for it I can imagine. You like the skill of tricking the people who are officiating the game. I mean I don't deny that it exists, but it's a terrible skill to like.

Are you a fan of flopping and arm flailing in basketball, dives and fake injuries in soccer, etc.?

Edited July 11, 2019 by Huckleberry

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

No, I'm a fan of framing in baseball.  Analogies are for people that can't handle the facts presented them.

[Huckleberry 33676]

Quite a weird response. The analogy isn't necessary at all. You like watching the officials get tricked. That's a bad opinion and you should feel bad for having it.

[Beau Vine 55027]

41 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

i like framing as a skill, so i don't like automated strike zone idea.

Big fan of Duke basketball, Manu Ginobili, and Chris Paul, I assume.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

28 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Yeah, that's about the worst argument for it I can imagine. You like the skill of tricking the people who are officiating the game. I mean I don't deny that it exists, but it's a terrible skill to like.

Are you a fan of flopping and arm flailing in basketball, dives and fake injuries in soccer, etc.?

Nailed it. Get the call right. It isn’t as egregious as flopping because it isn’t as obvious, but it’s in the family. 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

you frame balls and strikes.  borderline calls.  a poorly received pitch will be called a ball more often.  a well received pitch will be called a strike more often.  *lucky* strikes, where you don't hit your spot but end up in the zone, get called balls more often.  nothing about appreciating that part of the game make me like duke basketball, as similar as they might seem.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

But...an automated strike zone would have 100% accuracy. How is there even an argument against this lol?

[Huckleberry 33676]

You're strengthening the analogy, not weakening it. Players in all sports try to draw calls and exaggerate their motions not just when the call shouldn't be made in their favor, but also when it should be made in their favor.

If it's a ball it should be called a ball, and if it's a strike it should be called a strike. The art of framing only exists because umpires are inconsistent and miss calls. If every call was always correctly made it would never have even existed.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

3 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

But...an automated strike zone would have 100% accuracy. How is there even an argument against this lol?

I don't dispute it would be more accurate.  I'm saying that part of being a MLB catcher is learning the very hard skill of calmly receiving pitches that are moving like crazy.   And the catchers that are better at that should be regarded as the better catchers.  (There are other benefits of good framing I'm not discussing in here too, like the effect it has between the pitchers' ears).

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

7 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

But...an automated strike zone would have 100% accuracy. How is there even an argument against this lol?

And here's one where analogy is a little appropriate: instant replay.  I don't dispute that replay gives us more accuracy.  I just think it takes away from the game.  Accuracy isn't the only concern I have.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

13 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You're strengthening the analogy, not weakening it. Players in all sports try to draw calls and exaggerate their motions not just when the call shouldn't be made in their favor, but also when it should be made in their favor.

one is a worthy athletic skill.  one is drama.

[smwhorn 483]

Why are umpires needed?  Is there any call in baseball that is not a judgment call?

fair/foul; out/safe; ball/strike; HR/not HR.

Even shit like catcher or fan interference can be reviewed.  

I'm not necessarily advocating that but if you want the calls right, the computer/video can get it done.

[Beau Vine 55027]

20 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I don't dispute it would be more accurate.  I'm saying that part of being a MLB catcher is learning the very hard skill of calmly receiving pitches that are moving like crazy.  

It's only part of it because we have a shitty, inefficient method for calling the strike zone.  You're a fan of something that only exists because of a flaw in the game. 

To be fair, I know what you're saying -- I used to think Jeff Mathis was an absolute waste of a roster spot until I watched him catch a bunch of games over the last two years.  Now I know he's only a waste of a batting order slot.  But an automated strike zone would remove basically all of Jeff Mathis's value and force him into retirement, which I'm OK with. 

Edited July 11, 2019 by Beau Vine

[jimmyjazz 46526]

How would an automated strike zone account for a batter's stance prior to the pitch?  Would it just be generated off compiled video evidence? 

It seems obvious that the pitcher has to deal with what he sees.  If a batter crouches more or less than his "data" suggests is nominal, then the pitcher is working off flawed information.  He doesn't get to see the top and the bottom of the computerized strike zone -- what he sees is shifted from there, and perhaps even compressed or stretched.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it, and maybe my concern is in the noise, but to me it seems like the technology for pulling this off could be ahead of the reality of doing so.

[Helobious 9516]

Obsession with pitch framing is what convinced the Yankees and a plethora of other teams to sign Chris Stewart. He was without question one of the worst athletes I’ve ever seen play a sport at a professional level, almost Jayson Nix-esque. About as good of a hitter as a blind 12 year old with one fucking arm would have been if you plucked him out of the stands and asked him to pinch hit. Not only that, he fucking sucked at catching. He’s the only person I’ve ever seen let a CALLED strike three get away from him and allow the batter to reach first. He was an absolute fucking beating to watch play. Him and his 9 career homers over 10 MLB seasons can go fuck themselves. 

But the analytics or whatever said he was really really good at framing pitches and fooling idiotic umpires, so baseball fans were subjected to watching him play for almost a decade. So yes I’m 100% for anything that eliminates pitch framing as a desirable skill in a catcher.

[Guest]

19 hours ago, bschoolprof said:

The first question is a good one.  I can't find too much online about what they actually did for this game, but I think if implemented, it's going to have to be a standardized zone like it is on TV, not customized like it's implied in the rule book. That hurts guys like altuve and helps guys like judge.  

Why cannot the computer adjust to the nipples and kneecaps, so to speak?

[Guest]

15 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

How would an automated strike zone account for a batter's stance prior to the pitch?  Would it just be generated off compiled video evidence? 

It seems obvious that the pitcher has to deal with what he sees.  If a batter crouches more or less than his "data" suggests is nominal, then the pitcher is working off flawed information.  He doesn't get to see the top and the bottom of the computerized strike zone -- what he sees is shifted from there, and perhaps even compressed or stretched.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it, and maybe my concern is in the noise, but to me it seems like the technology for pulling this off could be ahead of the reality of doing so.

IDGAF how he stands.  Generate the strike zone from his normal stature.

 

Any deviation is going to be infinitely better than the bias in the game now. not that you went there, but I don't want to hear that we cannot go automated because of imperfections.  The current system is anything BUT perfect.

Edited July 12, 2019 by slorch

[Seasick Sailor 3747]

 

[Huckleberry 33676]

15 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

How would an automated strike zone account for a batter's stance prior to the pitch?  Would it just be generated off compiled video evidence? 

It seems obvious that the pitcher has to deal with what he sees.  If a batter crouches more or less than his "data" suggests is nominal, then the pitcher is working off flawed information.  He doesn't get to see the top and the bottom of the computerized strike zone -- what he sees is shifted from there, and perhaps even compressed or stretched.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it, and maybe my concern is in the noise, but to me it seems like the technology for pulling this off could be ahead of the reality of doing so.

Seems like that tech wouldn't take long to develop. There would be one strike zone tech official at the game and he'd have a screen that shows the players from the centerfield camera. On his touch screen the horizontal Xmin and Xmax are fixed vertical lines on the corners of the plate but he can adjust the Ymin and Ymax horizontal lines by touch and lock it in when the player takes his stance.

This certainly isn't possible at most levels, but no reason the majors couldn't have it at 16 parks per night.

[jimmyjazz 46526]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Seems like that tech wouldn't take long to develop. There would be one strike zone tech official at the game and he'd have a screen that shows the players from the centerfield camera. On his touch screen the horizontal Xmin and Xmax are fixed vertical lines on the corners of the plate but he can adjust the Ymin and Ymax horizontal lines by touch and lock it in when the player takes his stance.

This certainly isn't possible at most levels, but no reason the majors couldn't have it at 16 parks per night.

OK, I'll buy that, although there is still some human variability at play.  It's gotta be way better than what we have now, for sure.

A more fundamental question to which I should know the answer:  is the strike zone a plane referenced to a part of the plate, or is it a 3D volume with some extent along the Z axis?  In either case, would a strike be called just as long as any part of the ball clipped any part of the strike zone?

[Guest]

JMHO... if half the ball travels through the strike zone, it qualifies as a strike.

If that makes the strike zone too small, making 'any touch of the ball through the zone a strike might be better.  Strike three on Yordan Alvarez last night was not remotely near the zone.

The strike zone should be the shape of the plate, extending upwards, contained by the height and depth parameters described in the rulebook.

Edited July 12, 2019 by slorch

[Felix 607]

If any part of the ball touches any part of the strike zone it's a strike.  Thus if the ball crosses any part of the plate (black included)  while between the bottom of the knee and 6 inches or so above the belt buckle it should be called a strike.

[Seasick Sailor 3747]

You Can't get Mad at Trackman: A Day Under the Watchful Eye of the RoboUmp

By: Dan Connolly 

YORK, Pa. – The concept has fascinated for years: a robot umpire.

If the technology is there, why not get rid of the human version of the ball-and-strike arbiter with a computerized system that maintains a consistent strike zone from inning to inning and game to game?

Well, now the technology is here.

On Wednesday evening, in partnership with Major League Baseball, the independent Atlantic League rolled out the Automated Ball-Strike System (ABS) during its All-Star Game at PeoplesBank Park.

Throughout Wednesday’s game, a 3D-Doppler radar screen attached to the roof of the stadium directly behind home plate registered pitches and sent the information to a laptop computer integrated with TrackMan data. That strike-ball info was then transmitted from the computer in the press box to home-plate umpire Brian deBrauwere, who carried an iPhone with Bluetooth in his pocket and wore an Apple AirPod wireless headphone in his right ear.

After each pitch, he’d hear the ball or strike directive and then make the call on the field, with only a second or two lag in the execution.

For the most part, it worked. But there were some minor glitches – not surprising considering this was the first full implementation of the technology within an entire game.

There was a three-pitch period in which deBrauwere didn’t receive a signal from his phone to the earpiece. Then, in the middle of the game, the system lost connection for a half-inning, requiring deBrauwere to do what he’s done for a decade as a pro umpire. He went old school – like back to last week — and called balls and strikes until he had a break in between innings and the connection could be restored. That took roughly a minute. And it was imperceptible unless you were watching deBrauwere’s every move.

TrackMan data – used in the majors and MLB-affiliated minor-league teams to record information such as launch angle and exit velocity – already was established for a chunk of the Atlantic League All-Stars, since many have been in affiliated pro ball in the past five years. Therefore, their strike zones, based on attributes such as height and stance, were already created in the database. That allowed the system to adjust the chest-to-knees zone for each individual player.

Still, it wasn’t foolproof. One hitter was rung-up on a two-strike fastball that was clearly low, but apparently nicked the bottom of the zone as it headed to the dirt. Those kinds of alterations should get made as all eight Atlantic League parks use the system in the second half of the season.

But on the evening it made its pro debut with significant fanfare, the ABS was fairly seamless. To the point that one pitcher, Southern Maryland’s Daryl Thompson, didn’t realize it was being used until his catcher informed him after he pitched. The only clues, Thompson said sheepishly, were that he once got the ball thrown back to him before deBrauwere raised his hand to indicate a strike. And he also noticed the ump had an AirPod.

“It was crazy because I saw the earpiece in the umpire’s ear, but I didn’t think anything of it when I was out there,” Thompson said.

That’s the hope for this new technology, one that ultimately could be used in affiliated minor-league games and, perhaps, in the majors one day: that no one really notices.

On Wednesday, though, it was the story. A legitimate curiosity for media, players, fans and staff.

Here’s an inside look from a cross-section of those who experienced it.

The home-plate umpire

The 36-year-old deBrauwere, who made it as high as the Triple-A International League, said he was chosen to be the RoboUmp’s companion Wednesday because he lived in Hershey, Penn., about a 45-minute drive from York, and was available to make a dry-run with the equipment on Monday.

Those who know deBrauwere, however, say he was selected because of his unflappable demeanor. If things went temporarily wrong Wednesday under the glare of the national spotlight – media outlets at the ballpark included Central Pennsylvania newspapers and TV stations as well as The Athletic, The Washington Post, the Associated Press and sporttechie.com – deBrauwere wouldn’t flinch.

And he didn’t when he lost Bluetooth connection and umped a frame without using the technology. He said he was prepared to take over; it’s what any home-plate umpire would do with the automated system in place.

“I have to umpire every pitch of a game like it’s going to be missed by the system because I never know when that’s going to happen,” he said. “So, I try to do that and, then, when I didn’t get a readout, I tried to stay with whatever I thought was accurate and go from there.”

He said, in comparison to other umpires, he might be a little on the slow side in making his calls, so the slight delay didn’t bother him. There was some interpretation needed, though, when he was forced to call the half-inning himself. He wanted to mimic the system’s zone – which wasn’t much different from his besides being a little tighter on the corners and a little more liberal up and down.

“I was kind of trying to understand what the system has been calling and keep it as consistent to that as possible,” he said. “Because it wouldn’t really be fair to the hitters for the zone to completely change in the middle of the game and then change back. So that’s gonna be one of the challenges for us umpires in this league.”

All told, he said there were only a few pitches in the game that were different than what he would have called. And he felt like it went smoothly. He even kind of enjoyed it, though he admitted the attention was a little more than he initially expected.

“It was a little bit stressful to start just because I’ve gotten so used to doing something in a certain way. And I had to change that pretty significantly. But once I got comfortable with someone talking in my ear and kind of the timing of it all, I think I got into a little bit of a flow and relaxed a little,” he said. “But it was a little bit nerve-wracking. I didn’t want to screw anything up and make a mockery of it while (the media) was here.”

The veteran starting pitcher

York Revolution right-hander Mitch Atkins has had plenty of high-pressure moments in his 16-season pro career. He made 10 appearances in the majors from 2009-11 for the Chicago Cubs and Baltimore Orioles.

In 2011, his big-league starting debut came against the defending AL-champion Texas Rangers in Arlington, and he allowed one run in six innings.

So, at age 33, throwing the first pitch to an automated system in an exhibition game in an independent league isn’t exactly butterfly-inducing.

But, hey, Atkins had a mission with the first pitch.

“I was just trying to throw a strike, really trying to throw it down the middle. A fastball down the middle is gonna be a strike with an umpire or a TrackMan,” Atkins said. “So, I wasn’t really nervous. I’m always a little anxious before games, but TrackMan doesn’t really affect me.”

His first pitch of the All-Star Game was, indeed, a waist-high fastball to Justin Pacchioli of Somerset. A no-doubter called a strike. And with that, Atkins was in the history books. Not something the easygoing Carolinian was too concerned about.

“I haven’t really thought about it in detail. I guess I’m still more in game mode and not really thinking about the future of TrackMan,” he said. “I think once this stuff catches on more I think it will sink in a little more as (me) being a pioneer of TrackMan. I can then tell my grandkids I was there at the start.”

Atkins said he threw one inside fastball he thought should have been a strike once it was framed well by his catcher, but it was called a ball. And then he threw a high fastball at the batter’s chest that never gets called a strike by a human umpire, but it got the nod from the ABS.

“The high pitches that it calls, I don’t necessarily think they are strikes, as a pitcher, visually,” he said. “Every pitch that I’ve thrown up there has always been a ball my whole career, from 6 years old until now, so it’s different to see them called strikes now.”

Ultimately, the system might benefit pitchers. But Atkins said he prefers the human element. And now he can’t blame the human element, he joked.

“If TrackMan is calling the same pitches all the time, then (arguing) will be done. You can’t get mad at TrackMan,” Atkins said. “Of course, I shouldn’t get mad at umpires, either.”

The pitch-framing catcher

One of the primary purposes of the Atlantic League is to provide opportunities for players who were on the cusp of the majors, but now are no longer considered prospects, or for players who organizations don’t want to stash in the affiliated minors. Occasionally, those guys can do enough in the Atlantic League to get another call from an affiliated team.

The others wait, and keep playing for a living, albeit barely a living – the salary tops out at $3,000 per month.

So, when you are James Skelton, a 33-year-old defensive-minded catcher who reached Triple A for Cincinnati and Washington but has now spent seven seasons in the Atlantic League, it might be easy to be bitter that the ABS is taking away one of your finest attributes: the ability to frame pitches.

But Skelton doesn’t fully see it that way. He sees the bigger picture.

“As a catcher, I don’t really like it too much, personally, because it takes away from my skill of receiving the ball. But if it is going to help the game at the big-league level, and they are looking to do this at the big leagues, well, that’s why we are all here for.”

Skelton said pitch-framing – the art of moving borderline pitches into the zone smoothly enough for umpires to call them strikes – might become a discarded art in the Atlantic League. For now, though, it is still needed in affiliated ball, which means Atlantic League catchers must keep working on that part of their games if they hope to move on.

He did that on Wednesday, shifting a few borderline pitches skillfully that ultimately were called balls by the ABS. deBrauwere, the umpire, said, he instinctively would have called them strikes based on Skelton’s craftmanship, but instead he relayed what the system ruled. The umpires won’t overrule called pitches, using their judgment only when the system isn’t working.

“Skelton is one of the best defensive catchers, so he makes everything look pretty good,” deBrauwere said. “There were pitches that the system called a ball that I thought for a second may have been a strike because Skelton is so good at making them look good, so that just goes to show how good he is at his job.”

Skelton said that if catchers aren’t worrying about pitch-framing, they can focus on other skills such as blocking balls in the dirt. It likely will result in a change in focus.

“I don’t really have to worry about the receiving part of the game anymore, as far as trying to get balls called strikes,” Skelton said. “So it’s gonna get me to, I think, concentrate more on blocking.”

The hitter (who got jobbed)

If Atkins goes down as the first pitcher to throw to the ABS, Lancaster’s Joey Terdoslavich will be remembered in history as the first hitter to get jobbed by the TrackMan data.

In the second inning Wednesday, he was rung up on a low-and-outside pitch that he thought was clearly a ball. The ump did, too. ABS didn’t, though, and it was strike three.

Instinctively, Terdoslavich glared at deBrauwere, who calmly pointed to his earpiece.

There was nothing else to do.

“You just go back to the dugout and get ready for our next at-bat, I guess,” Terdoslavich said. “That’s what I do with umpires. If they miss a call, I tell them. ‘Hey, I think you missed it’ and then it’s on to your next at-bat.”

It was a ball, deBrauwere said, but because it was tumbling out of the strike zone near the plate, he understands why it would be picked up by the radar as a strike.

“It’s a two-seamer that’s moving down, so not only is it just barely shaving the bottom of the strike zone, but it’s also received way down in the dirt,” deBrauwere said. “That’s a pitch that we’ve gotten used to calling a ball, but, having said that, I can see that that pitch probably shaved the bottom.”

Otherwise, the 30-year-old Terdoslavich, who spent parts of three seasons with the Atlanta Braves from 2013-15, said he actually thought the automated system was better than he anticipated.

“One blunder, if it was a blunder, which I think it probably was. That’s pretty good,” Terdoslavich said. “Nothing’s perfect. The umpires aren’t perfect. TrackMan is not going to be perfect, I don’t think. But if it’s really close, I can deal with it.”

So, does the ex-big leaguer think the system will fly in the majors? Not anytime soon.

“Personally, do I think it could work? Sure. Do I think we’ll ever see it (in MLB), at least in my time playing? Probably not,” he said. “But, like I said, if they asked me, I’m telling them I thought it worked pretty good, even though it screwed me on one pitch. I mean, I’ve been screwed by umpires before, you know?”

The league executive

Rick White can view the 2019 Atlantic League All-Star Game only one way: a rousing success.

A longtime businessman and former MLB Properties president who is in his fifth year running the Atlantic League, White was beaming throughout the long day.

He raved about how the York Revolution handled the festivities and the implementation of the ABS. He raved about the relative smoothness of the technology and deBrauwere’s calm under fire during the occasional hiccup.

White raved about the partnership with MLB – something he has been pushing for since he became league president – and how Morgan Sword, MLB’s senior vice president for league economics and operations, was on hand to see the debut of the system the day after the big-league All-Star Game.

White was thrilled with the turnout of media, the attention paid to the system and the belief that Wednesday will have a long-reaching effect on the sport. He said 42 baseballs were pulled from the game periodically and two will be sent to the National Baseball Hall of Fame. The others will be presented as mementos to the umpires, to members of the Atlantic League board and York Revolution staff as well as other dignitaries. White’s keeping one, too. A reminder of how well it all went.

And this isn’t the end of the experimentation. The Atlantic League, in cooperation with MLB, will be implementing more rule changes in the second half, including counting two-strike bunts as fouls (rather than strike three), and allowing batters to “steal first,” or attempt to get to first base on any pitch not caught in the air on any count (and not just on a dropped third strike).

Some of these have no chance of getting beyond the experimental stage. Others might. For the Atlantic League, it’s all about being part of the process.

“Baseball is evolving. We are delighted to be a part of that evolution. We’re grateful Major League Baseball selected us to do these tests,” White said. “We understand and I believe our guests and our on-field personnel understand, it’s not going to be without a speed-bump here or there. But, overall, if you expect that, we came away doing pretty well.”

The fan/dad/ex-big-league player and manager

Not everyone loves the proposed changes to baseball.

Not everyone thinks that the game needs to get faster or more exciting or be free of umpiring mistakes. Some baseball fans want the sport and its rules to remain more in tune with its history.

Like the guy in the second row near the visitors’ dugout Wednesday in York. Slicked-back dark hair, tanned, good-looking, mid-60s. He was there to see his son play in the All-Star Game.

He was also watching the automated strike calls. He was unimpressed.

“I don’t like it. I want the human element,” the guy said. “I heard one fan say, ‘Well, you can’t argue with anyone now.’ I think once you instituted replay for the home run call, I think you opened Pandora’s Box on a lot of stuff, all this replay stuff. Some people like it. And, if you are a traditionalist and you like the old way of playing, you’re not gonna like it.”

This fan knows a thing or two about baseball. He was a first-round pick of the New York Mets. He was an All-Star, a World Series champion. He managed the Orioles for two seasons. He’s now a special assistant with the New York Yankees.

Yeah, Lee Mazzilli knows plenty about baseball. He intently watched the robot-umpire experience. He observed how his son, L.J., an infielder with the Long Island Ducks, handled it. And he felt like Terdoslavich had a real beef on that low strike near the dirt.

“It’s got its flaws. It’s gotta be tweaked. We’ll see how it goes,” Mazzilli said. “But I don’t think it’s gonna happen in the big leagues. I don’t think it’s getting by the players’ union.”

Mazzilli wasn’t much of an arguer when he was an Orioles’ manager. He was ejected twice during his tenure. Defending your case loudly on a miscall doesn’t happen much anymore because of instant replay. So that’s not what bothers him.

No, what Mazzilli doesn’t like about ABS is what a lot of fans and players will grouse about, too. It just seems like another step away from yesterday’s game.

“If I had a vote on it, I’d say no,” Mazzilli said. “Why can’t we just play baseball like we used to play when we were kids? We just played. Why not? It was fun.”

[Huckleberry 33676]

48 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

OK, I'll buy that, although there is still some human variability at play.  It's gotta be way better than what we have now, for sure.

A more fundamental question to which I should know the answer:  is the strike zone a plane referenced to a part of the plate, or is it a 3D volume with some extent along the Z axis?  In either case, would a strike be called just as long as any part of the ball clipped any part of the strike zone?

It's a 2D rectangle, but the ball is 3D and so long as any part of it touches any part of that 2D rectangle then it's a strike. The strike zone rectangle is fixed in the Z axis (with the coordinate system I used above) at the front edge of the plate.

For all practical purposes the ball is almost always moving fast enough that it may as well be a 2D circle. I suppose an exaggerated eephus pitch might be moving in the necessary arc to clip the strike zone with the back of the ball but not the front or midplane. 

But your question is pretty good as for what the computer looks at. I'm betting the computer looks at the moment that the midplane (full diameter circle) of the ball meets the plane containing the strike zone.

[jimmyjazz 46526]

13 minutes ago, Felix said:

If any part of the ball touches any part of the strike zone it's a strike.  Thus if the ball crosses any part of the plate (black included)  while between the bottom of the knee and 6 inches or so above the belt buckle it should be called a strike.

This implies that a radar has to sweep not only left-right but front-back (obviously at a very high speed) to determine if any part of the ball clipped that 3D volume.  I doubt it's difficult tech to implement, but it's more than just a fixed "curtain".

I find all of this fascinating . . . the sooner they implement it, the better.  Foul balls are next?

[jimmyjazz 46526]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

It's a 2D rectangle,

Heh . . . two posts, two different answers.

[Huckleberry 33676]

Well I stand corrected. Went to read Rule 2.00 and it says "area over home plate." If it's interpreted literally that means the strike zone is a plate shaped prism from the height of the hollow below the kneecap to the midpoint between the batter's waist and the top of his shoulders. This rule seems to always be interpreted as the front edge of the plate, though, at least in my experience.

Edited July 12, 2019 by Huckleberry

[Beau Vine 55027]

2 hours ago, Helobious said:

Obsession with pitch framing is what convinced the Yankees and a plethora of other teams to sign Chris Stewart. He was without question one of the worst athletes I’ve ever seen play a sport at a professional level, almost Jayson Nix-esque. About as good of a hitter as a blind 12 year old with one fucking arm would have been if you plucked him out of the stands and asked him to pinch hit. Not only that, he fucking sucked at catching. He’s the only person I’ve ever seen let a CALLED strike three get away from him and allow the batter to reach first.

 

Sorry you missed Tim Wakefield's entire career.

[Beau Vine 55027]

34 minutes ago, Felix said:

If any part of the ball touches any part of the strike zone it's a strike.  Thus if the ball crosses any part of the plate (black included)  while between the bottom of the knee and 6 inches or so above the belt buckle it should be called a strike.

The black is not part of the plate.

[jimmyjazz 46526]

4 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Well I stand corrected. Went to read Rule 2.00 and it says "area over home plate." If it's interpreted literally that means the strike zone is a plate shaped prism from the height of the hollow below the kneecap to the midpoint between the batter's waist and the top of his shoulders.

This interpretation is probably limited by the human ability to detect and process ball movement across that prism (which would be "limited" at best).  I don't think such a limitation would exist with modern technology.  The practical implication could be that a lot more strikes would be called.  THAT is a big deal.

[Felix 607]

2 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

The black is not part of the plate.

You are correct, sir, I meant to type "excluding".  Sorry about that.

['stache 21928]

Auto strike zone seems like a fine idea since it is supposed to be an objective call anyway and we have the technology. I can't imagine moving the pitching mound. Pitching has to be huge on muscle memory and even a foot would upend decades of mental and muscle training. Not to mention that every baseball field would need to spend money to move all the way down to high school. You can't have a different distance in high school, college, and pro. The three point line is not a comparison because the game involves shooting from different distances with regularity, it's not a single motion that pitchers have been training for their entire lives.

[Fondren & Main 6779]

2 hours ago, Seasick Sailor said:

 

Looked like a strike to me.