Automating the strike zone

[Beau Vine 55027]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

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.

The suggestions I've seen have them moving it a few inches a year for several years.  And I think you're overstating the difficulty in adjusting.  The mound distances are the same, but the mounds aren't the same shape everywhere, and pitchers have to deal with that.

['stache 21928]

13 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

The suggestions I've seen have them moving it a few inches a year for several years.  And I think you're overstating the difficulty in adjusting.  The mound distances are the same, but the mounds aren't the same shape everywhere, and pitchers have to deal with that.

It just seems so unnecessary. What's wrong with the current distance? Pitchers throw harder so it's more difficult for batters? Have I missed multiple 0-0 extra inning games? Seems teams are hitting and scoring runs just fine.

[WBT 20776]

8 minutes ago, 'stache said:

What's wrong with the current distance? Pitchers throw harder so it's more difficult for batters? 

Strikeouts are at an all-time high.  Strikeouts are boring.

[bschoolprof 6281]

1 minute ago, WBT said:

Strikeouts are at an all-time high.  Strikeouts are boring.

Part of that is the flyball obsession though.  See the juiced ball thread.  

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

3 hours ago, slorch said:

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.

Nah, man. Jeff Mathis just did a great job framing the pitch lol. What a ridiculous argument. 

[Huckleberry 33676]

1 hour ago, WBT said:

Strikeouts are at an all-time high.  Strikeouts are boring.

Lower the seams, deaden the ball.

[Pato del Muerto 52973]

On 7/12/2019 at 11:48 AM, youdunnf'dup said:

Nah, man. Jeff Mathis just did a great job framing the pitch lol. What a ridiculous argument. 

It was very clutch framing if I’m honest 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

On 7/12/2019 at 1:48 PM, youdunnf'dup said:

Nah, man. Jeff Mathis just did a great job framing the pitch lol. What a ridiculous argument. 

Automated umpires would completely eliminate the catcher skillset of pitch framing.  

[Guest]

On 7/12/2019 at 12:12 PM, WBT said:

Strikeouts are at an all-time high.  Strikeouts are boring.

disagree.

Strikeouts are great...'cept for the 3rd strike called looking out of the zone because the ump wanted to shine.

Legit great pitching is fun to watch.  Bullshittery and gamesmanship with the strike zone, both towards the hitter or a pitcher is not.

Edited July 14, 2019 by slorch

[Guest]

9 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Automated umpires would completely eliminate the catcher skillset of pitch framing.  

yet another positive.  get that Harden bullshit out of here.

Just play the fucking game, don't beg for the official's help.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

4 hours ago, slorch said:

yet another positive.  get that Harden bullshit out of here.

Just play the fucking game, don't beg for the official's help.

I agree with pitch framing.  While I like the gamesmanship of it, I can do without it. 

I also think one of the better parts of the game will be lost. Umpires will often have a slightly off but consistent strike zone that pitchers and batters must adjust to.  When an ump always calls a slightly inside pitch a strike, for example, I always find it interesting to see who is able to adjust to that and who isn't. 

An always consistent strike zone across all games will take away that aspect of the game.  I think it will favor hitters in the long run, and will also close the gap between great hitters who can adjust and good hitters who struggle with it. 

[Guest]

I think Astros pitching would respond mightily to it.

As for the 'adjustment' you speak of, I agree in that I can acknowledge the competitive response being part of the athleticism required.  That's all out the window though when the ump miraculously forgets what his strike zone was.... oh and it changes from a pitch Chris Sale throws versus one that Wade Miley does. That shit drives me crazy.  Nobody DESERVES a call.

I'd love for the call to be the call.  Fuck the personalities and reputations of the players involved.  It either is or is not a strike.  and stop fucking over batters because they didn't wait for you to call Ball 4. Stop fucking pitchers because they gave you a dirty look.

Edited July 14, 2019 by slorch

[NeverMarryAStripper 22055]

Do you also celebrate football refs who make up their own rules, but apply them consistently? Let’s just not call holding in this game and see which teams can figure out our made up rules and adjust to them

 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

7 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Do you also celebrate football refs who make up their own rules, but apply them consistently? Let’s just not call holding in this game and see which teams can figure out our made up rules and adjust to them

 

If that football ref existed, I would celebrate the players who could adjust to it.  Instead, football refs rarely call holding consistently across the board.  They nearly always favor one team over the other.

[Ichabod 184]

1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

If that football ref existed, I would celebrate the players who could adjust to it.  Instead, football refs rarely call holding consistently across the board.  They nearly always favor one team over the other.

Holding is a subjective call in my opinion while a strike is objective

[FondrenRoad 4378]

17 minutes ago, Ichabod said:

Holding is a subjective call in my opinion while a strike is objective

The strike zone depends on a batter's height and stance.  If a machine follows the strike rule exactly, a batter could shrink his strike zone to almost nothing.  

[FondrenRoad 4378]

I'd get rid of all the other umps before the home plate ump.  Teams could play out all close calls and have instant review.  Then balls won't be pulled into the gravity well around Joe West when he is umping 3rd base.

[Surly Bevo 25542]

If they go to this two groups that win big are hitters in general and pitchers who can smoke high heat as often you see those balls that are technically strikes get called as balls.  Pitchers who throw a ton of low breakers and as mentioned catchers who are great at framing will lose some.

 

Curious how you guys would feel if the automated strike zone moved around a bit? What if they could randomly slightly move the zone before a game but then lock it in and it be consistent for the entirety of that game.  I think generally I wouldn't be for it but as others have said there is a bit of a beauty to the game to see how hitters adjust to a bit of variation (though I too can't fucking stand when that variation results in inconsistency within a game)

[NeverMarryAStripper 22055]

Why have rules then. Just have the managers and umps meet at home plate before the game to negotiate the rules for that game

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Why have rules then. Just have the managers and umps meet at home plate before the game to negotiate the rules for that game

Just have everyone bring their wheelbarrow and compare it with Bregman's...

[Surly Bevo 25542]

Can always count on a couple of the law and order boys to give completely thoughtless responses....you do realize the entirety of our social order isn't built on rules...it's built on rules PLUS the interpretation and application of those rules you jackasses.  Even when you automate the strike zone some coder in Bangalore is going to interpret 2.00 and decide where the top of the shoulders are, where the hollow beneath the knee is or how it's software reads and interprets a batter to determine those etc etc etc

But I digress, having thought about this more I think absolutely they would have to vary it up a bit and make hitters adjust.  MLB is at a point where one of their major issues is attention span.  Offense is fun...to a point, then it becomes the thing that makes a game really really long.  

[NeverMarryAStripper 22055]

I would hardly call my self a law and order boy. However, interpreting the rules to determine what is meant by the hollow of the knee is not the same thing as saying it’s more fun when the umps basically ignore the strike zone that’s defined because then the batters have to adjust. If that’s what you want just say the strike is over the plate somewhere between the head and feet subject to the umpires discretion

[Huckleberry 33676]

Also, people who are convinced that it would help hitters are putting a lot of faith in something that may be completely wrong. Did y'all not see the video of the minor league all star game strike call? That was a strike because it was sinking heavily but crossed the front edge of the plate with part of the ball even with the hollow of the batter's knee. Pretty much every human umpire ever would have called that a ball. It was a strike.

Next tell me how much hitters are going to love strike calls on 100mph fastballs that cross the plate at a height halfway between their waist and the top of their shoulders. Those are never called strikes right now. They should be. I actually think an automated textbook strike zone will help pitchers, not hitters.

[jimmyjazz 46526]

4 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Also, people who are convinced that it would help hitters are putting a lot of faith in something that may be completely wrong. Did y'all not see the video of the minor league all star game strike call? That was a strike because it was sinking heavily but crossed the front edge of the plate with part of the ball even with the hollow of the batter's knee. Pretty much every human umpire ever would have called that a ball. It was a strike.

This is exactly why I said this would lead to a lot more strikes.  If the ball merely needs to clip a precisely defined volume, as opposed to a single plane that a middle-aged man struggles to assess, then there is a lot more opportunity for pitchers.  Sure, the counterargument is that the radar system will have much higher accuracy, so we'd eliminate the vast majority of balls that were incorrectly called strikes, but I'll bet the 3-D aspect of the strike zone would dominate.

[Huckleberry 33676]

That may be true, but I'm only talking high versus low. Look at the strike zone shown on the screen here. An automated strike zone would add a damn foot to the top of that zone. A foot!

Bellinger struck out swinging at a 95mph fastball at the top of the displayed zone. Imagine having to cover another foot vertically.

[Surly Bevo 25542]

11 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Also, people who are convinced that it would help hitters are putting a lot of faith in something that may be completely wrong. Did y'all not see the video of the minor league all star game strike call? That was a strike because it was sinking heavily but crossed the front edge of the plate with part of the ball even with the hollow of the batter's knee. Pretty much every human umpire ever would have called that a ball. It was a strike.

Next tell me how much hitters are going to love strike calls on 100mph fastballs that cross the plate at a height halfway between their waist and the top of their shoulders. Those are never called strikes right now. They should be. I actually think an automated textbook strike zone will help pitchers, not hitters.

I believe I acknowledged the pitchers who can pump high gas as beneficiaries....the question is how many of them can pump the gas hard enough.Frankly what is hard enough when that becomes a pitch that starts getting swung at with a lot more frequency.  Those are the pitches if you catch up to them go a long way the other direction....

 

[jimmyjazz 46526]

16 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

That may be true, but I'm only talking high versus low. Look at the strike zone shown on the screen here. An automated strike zone would add a damn foot to the top of that zone. A foot!

Bellinger struck out swinging at a 95mph fastball at the top of the displayed zone. Imagine having to cover another foot vertically.

I agree, and that's pretty much in line with what I've been trying to say.  It reduces the demand on the pitcher virtually to the point where they're just restricted left/right, because the vertical aspect of the strike zone (by rule) is not hard to hit.  ANY pitch that clips ANY part of that volume extending up from the plate, knees to nipples (or whatever) is a strike, which is just not even close to true now.

For a sport that wants to see more offense via juiced balls, this would be an interesting move in the opposite direction.

[NeverMarryAStripper 22055]

Then they need to change the rules that define the strike zone.

[Huckleberry 33676]

Huh?