Should machines be used for balls and strikes?

[Guest]

On 6/7/2021 at 11:19 AM, NeverMarryAStripper said:

So what happens when Russian hackers get in the system and initiate ransomware five minutes before the first pitch of game seven of the world series?

I hope they favor Cubanos.

[Guadaloopy 10954]

On 6/7/2021 at 4:24 AM, wood said:

I think that's what we're heading toward. You'll still need an ump back there for certain things. He just won't likely be calling balls & strikes. They're actually already testing a system in the minors somewhere. ump friend of mine who really follows this stuff closely told me about it. Ump has an earbud in his ear, and someone or some thing tells him what the system has called the pitch. My buddy is actually in favor of it, as he takes his job very seriously, knows every rule, etc, and he's really critical of strike zone inconsistency, etc. He says the bugs still need to be worked out of the system, as it still gives you some real WTF calls, even worse than what some umps do now, He says it's showing a lot of promise though. I'll see if I can get more details and get back here when I do.

There was a story on MLBN a few years back where Eric Byrne actually umped an independent league game like this.  He had the machine reading balls and strikes and sending an immediate signal if a strike.  To the fans in the stands and the players on the field, it was completely transparent and looked like any other game, minus the arguments over balls and strikes. 

[NeverMarryAStripper 21867]

On 6/10/2021 at 5:25 PM, Guadaloopy said:

 minus the arguments over balls and strikes. 

I call bullshit on that.  

[clapclapclap 9000]

Should we cure cancer?

o  Yes

o  No

[troph 24781]

after the CWS machine called strikes and balls can't get here soon enough.

[wood 11225]

Yeah that guy yesterday called a few balls strikes that were literally fully on the white line of the opposite batter's box. It was like for any pitch off the plate, he was just guessing or flipping a coin or something. I dunno if he's the same guy that was doing it in game 1, but FML. That's objectively terrible. It's not anywhere near the zone, 3, 4, even 5 balls off the plate, and it's fucking unhittable ... and you're calling it a strike?  If I had ever been that bad at my job for even one day of my career, I'd be in jail right now.

Re: the automation of it, I think we'd at least just be arguing over very fine discrepancies in calls vs the huge ones we see now, esp in the college game, and I could absolutely live with that. It would be a massive improvement.

Edited June 27, 2021 by wood

[troph 24781]

9 minutes ago, wood said:

Yeah that guy yesterday called a few balls strikes that were literally fully on the white line of the opposite batter's box. It was like for any pitch off the plate, he was just guessing or flipping a coin or something. I dunno if he's the same guy that was doing it in game 1, but FML. That's objectively terrible. It's not anywhere near the zone, 3, 4, even 5 balls off the plate, and it's fucking unhittable ... and you're calling it a strike?  If I had ever been that bad at my job for even one day of my career, I'd be in jail right now.

Re: the automation of it, I think we'd at least just be arguing over very fine discrepancies in calls vs the huge ones we see now, esp in the college game, and I could absolutely live with that. It would be a massive improvement.

it would make pitching much, much harder.  ERAs would go up, as would hits and walks.  batters stats would improve, we'd have a before machines, after machines conversation I think.

[NeverMarryAStripper 21867]

That sounds like the plot for terminator 

[Dbeasy 15040]

After watching the college World Series there  no doubt in my mind whatsoever that human imps need to be banished from the game forever. Whether it’s incompetence or crooked umpiring for gamblers, they need to be terminated. 

[immamac 42833]

1 minute ago, Dbeasy said:

After watching the college World Series there  no doubt in my mind whatsoever that human imps need to be banished from the game forever. Whether it’s incompetence or crooked umpiring for gamblers, they need to be terminated. 

Legitimately same pitches were being called however they felt like. There is no accountability for umpires and that's the problem, not the fact that humans are doing it. I agree with this "if you don't get at least 95% of pitches right you can't umpire" sentiment. There needs to be some accountability if humans are still going to call balls and strikes. 

[immamac 42833]

I guess if there is no machine led accountability the teams should be able to veto an umpire. Like 3 bad calls for both teams and he's out. 

[Ten Bears 2479]

I can see where calling high or low strikes isn't the easiest thing to do and understandingly has some variation but having a strike zone as wide as the batter's boxes is fucking ridiculous.   The Ump Cam shows that is not that hard to call inside and outside strikes.

But yeah it would drastically increase offensive production if Skynet starts calling strikes.

[perfectchaos007 6621]

The catcher skill of framing a ball will be obsolete. I won't miss it....

[wood 11225]

31 minutes ago, perfectchaos007 said:

The catcher skill of framing a ball will be obsolete. I won't miss it....

Yep, & it's amazing to me that umps fall for that shit.

[Nivek 16916]

Yep, & it's amazing to me that umps fall for that shit.

If I were an ump I would assume that it was a ball and the catcher is trying to con me.

[wood 11225]

1 hour ago, Nivek said:

If I were an ump I would assume that it was a ball and the catcher is trying to con me.

Yep. Exactly what I've been thinking. And it's so fucking obvious, too, even with the guys who are good at it.

[markstanco 12570]

Wont fly in mlb. All the umps are all about look at me look at me.

[NeverMarryAStripper 21867]

Isn’t that the way it is for just about our whole society these days

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

After watching the college World Series there  no doubt in my mind whatsoever that human imps need to be banished from the game forever. Whether it’s incompetence or crooked umpiring for gamblers, they need to be terminated. 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Nivek said:

If I were an ump I would assume that it was a ball and the catcher is trying to con me.

If I were an ump, I'd tell the catchers, "Stop fucking around with the framing horseshit, or it's a ball every time."

 

Catchers do it because they've been rewarded.  Break the process.

[OU Sucks 8796]

A machine, but not this one:

 

[Wulaw Horn 19063]

For those who think that offense will skyrocket 2 things:

1) not necessarily as in the aggregate there are tons of umps who refuse to call high or low strikes which is as important as left to right; and

2) if they balance in the game gets out of hand it’s a really easy fix- they can then recalibrate the strike zone (and the machine) until they get a balance between offense and defense that they like. This would be huge. 

[HoustonFrog 368]

Yes please. Hate the umps, the game isn’t about them

[27-25 2047]

5 hours ago, OU Sucks said:

A machine, but not this one:

 

That might still be an improvement over some of the CWS 2021 strike zones, but yeah, we should be able to do better.

[Huckleberry 32845]

21 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

For those who think that offense will skyrocket 2 things:

1) not necessarily as in the aggregate there are tons of umps who refuse to call high or low strikes which is as important as left to right; and

2) if they balance in the game gets out of hand it’s a really easy fix- they can then recalibrate the strike zone (and the machine) until they get a balance between offense and defense that they like. This would be huge. 

This is exactly right. High and low strikes would benefit pitchers a lot, and would be an easy tweak to the rules. And perhaps more importantly with everything going on right now, it would tip the scales toward accurate pitchers who change speeds and away from high spin rate pitchers who rely on lateral movement.

[Huckleberry 32845]

On 6/28/2021 at 1:14 PM, OU Sucks said:

A machine, but not this one:

 

That's a strike. The strike zone is set based on the batter's normal stance. The fact he squatted down a foot to bunt the ball does not change the strike zone.

That ball crosses through the strike zone at the top of the strike zone that existed when he was in his regular stance. Here's a high tech MS Paint composite showing where the ball crossed relative to his initial stance.

Edited June 29, 2021 by Huckleberry

[OU Sucks 8796]

51 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

That's a strike. The strike zone is set based on the batter's normal stance. The fact he squatted down a foot to bunt the ball does not change the strike zone.

That ball crosses through the strike zone at the top of the strike zone that existed when he was in his regular stance. Here's a high tech MS Paint composite showing where the ball crossed relative to his initial stance.

But that doesn't mention anything about a "normal" stance.  It says the stance as the batter is prepared to swing.  So if he goes into a crouch but goes back to standing more upright as the ball is being released and inbound, then the upright strike zone would make sense.  But he was crouched as the ball was let go and remained in that position until it was caught (and would have still been in the crouch had he offered).  But I am not an ump and it could vary depending on the league.

 

 

Edit - also found this:

Edited June 29, 2021 by OU Sucks

[Huckleberry 32845]

Right, but he is not prepared to swing in that squat that is only intended to shrink the zone so he can bunt. The video didn't show him perform a normal swing so we can't be certain, but I assumed that the initial screen shot showed him right after he turned from his normal stance to show bunt. If that's not accurate then yes things change.

But I'm pretty sure he doesn't normally swing in that exaggerated squat.

[TheBryMan81 2508]

On 6/10/2021 at 3:47 AM, Huckleberry said:

Pitch framing is not a good thing from a sports purity standpoint. It's the baseball equivalent of flopping in basketball and diving in soccer. It is a conscious effort to trick an official. 

 

 

[TheBryMan81 2508]

On 6/28/2021 at 5:18 AM, Ten Bears said:

I can see where calling high or low strikes isn't the easiest thing to do and understandingly has some variation but having a strike zone as wide as the batter's boxes is fucking ridiculous.   The Ump Cam shows that is not that hard to call inside and outside strikes.

But yeah it would drastically increase offensive production if Skynet starts calling strikes.

@Machinator how much would you charge to start calling balls/strikes?

[wood 11225]

On 6/28/2021 at 3:39 PM, Wulaw Horn said:

For those who think that offense will skyrocket 2 things:

1) not necessarily as in the aggregate there are tons of umps who refuse to call high or low strikes which is as important as left to right; and

2) if they balance in the game gets out of hand it’s a really easy fix- they can then recalibrate the strike zone (and the machine) until they get a balance between offense and defense that they like. This would be huge. 

Exactly. They can define the strike zone as tightly or loosely as they want to. They could make 'just touching the black' a strike, or 'just touching the white'. They could also give a full ball's width off the plate, or make it to where the entire ball has to be over the plate at some point. 

As far as high & low go, I have a problem with a set range. It should vary according to the batter's size. The strike zone is supposed to be from the bottom of the kneecaps to halfway between the belt and shoulders (so about the bottom of the letters. But rather than call it that way, they pretty much go with a 'one size fits all' approach, & rarely call anything above the belt a strike.  The true strike zone could be programed in with rest of the parameters, with a system in place to also read the actual strike zone of the individual batter. That would allow the pitcher to use the entire zone again, in a way they haven't been able to do for decades.

[Wulaw Horn 19063]

Just now, wood said:

Exactly. They can define the strike zone as tightly or loosely as they want to. They could make 'just touching the black' a strike, or 'just touching the white'. They could also give a full ball's width off the plate, or make it to where the entire ball has to be over the plate at some point. 

As far as high & low go, I have a problem with a set range. It should vary according to the batter's size. The strike zone is supposed to be from the bottom of the kneecaps to halfway between the belt and shoulders (so about the bottom of the letters. But rather than call it that way, they pretty much go with a 'one size fits all' approach, & rarely call anything above the belt a strike.  The true strike zone could be programed in with rest of the parameters, with a system in place to also read the actual strike zone of the individual batter. That would allow the pitcher to use the entire zone again, in a way they haven't been able to do for decades.

I would assume every player would be measured in cleats before the season started and that the zone would be particularly to their height. I guess it doesn’t have to be that way but it seems like that would be the right way to do it. 

[wood 11225]

On 6/29/2021 at 1:34 PM, Huckleberry said:

That's a strike. The strike zone is set based on the batter's normal stance. The fact he squatted down a foot to bunt the ball does not change the strike zone.

That ball crosses through the strike zone at the top of the strike zone that existed when he was in his regular stance. Here's a high tech MS Paint composite showing where the ball crossed relative to his initial stance.

Agreed. That pitch was up in the zone, but it looked like a strike to me. He squatted into it. Just because he squatted low to bunt doesn't mean the pitcher has to hit that new zone. I see guys squat on good pitches all the time, & the ump falling for it. Blows my mind. 

Now, if the guy wants to squat to hit, a la Pete Rose, then he should get that zone, but he also has to live with the power limitation etc that that stance saddles him with.

Edited June 30, 2021 by wood

[wood 11225]

5 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

I would assume every player would be measured in cleats before the season started and that the zone would be particularly to their height. I guess it doesn’t have to be that way but it seems like that would be the right way to do it. 

Sure, or they could use something similar to those tags the video game developers put on athletes to track their movements & base their strike zone on their normal stance.

Edited June 30, 2021 by wood

[wood 11225]

To me, best thing about the automation is that while we'd no doubt still have arguments over balls & strikes, the zone would be consistent for each batter and those arguments would be over minute discrepancies vs the huge ones we see now.

[Huckleberry 32845]

1 hour ago, wood said:

Agreed. That pitch was up in the zone, but it looked like a strike to me. He squatted into it. Just because he squatted low to bunt doesn't mean the pitcher has to hit that new zone. I see guys squat on good pitches all the time, & the ump falling for it. Blows my mind. 

Exactly, it should be based on a normal stance. Otherwise why wouldn't batters just swing as hard as they can on 0 and 1 strike counts and then if they get to 2 strikes change their stance to this?

 

[Js1 85259]

1 hour ago, wood said:

To me, best thing about the automation is that while we'd no doubt still have arguments over balls & strikes, the zone would be consistent for each batter and those arguments would be over minute discrepancies vs the huge ones we see now.

"Come on Robot Blue! That was 0.000625 inches outside the black! That's a fucking ball!" 

[dcar00 14147]

a bunt is preparing to swing

that said they could measure each player and based on knee and lower chest area they could load that info to create the zone for each player since the plate is static. 

regardless of how much you squat, lean back, try to bunt, your zone never changes.

 

[Helobious 9456]

12 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Exactly, it should be based on a normal stance. Otherwise why wouldn't batters just swing as hard as they can on 0 and 1 strike counts and then if they get to 2 strikes change their stance to this?

 

But then how do you define “normal” stance? Jeff Bagwell’s normal stance =/= Craig Counsell’s. 

[wood 11225]

Just use the sensors & telemetry to track each batter's stance in Spring Training. Then average all of that data and use it as the batter's stance for that season. Use that to set his strike zone for the season. Do it again the next Spring.

OR ... just use the sensors in real time throughout the season (assuming they're reliable and accurate). As the batter stands in the box, the system sets his strike zone prior to the pitcher starting his motion.

Either way would probably be a massive improvement over the 'one size fits all' bullshit approach they use now.

Edited June 30, 2021 by wood

[Beau Vine 54203]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

Exactly, it should be based on a normal stance. Otherwise why wouldn't batters just swing as hard as they can on 0 and 1 strike counts and then if they get to 2 strikes change their stance to this?

 

If I were umpiring the plate there, I'd loudly tell the catcher that any pitch he catches on the fly will be called a strike.

[NeverMarryAStripper 21867]

[Huckleberry 32845]

Well the next pitch was over the plate and crossed the zone higher than the batter's head and was (correctly) called a strike. 

[Rudiger 1160]

Come on! Who fuckin’ programmed this guy!?

[Firemans4Horn 18034]

This guy is really bad at his job

 

[Scraps 13560]

9/10....not 10/10.....slacker

[shadow_operative 15932]

28 minutes ago, Firemans4Horn said:

This guy is really bad at his job

 

what makes it even worse is that in the final AB, before those two outside "strikes", Hader threw a fastball that was 100% over the plate on the outer third and it was called a ball. then he throws that same pitch 5-6 inches more outside and they're called strikes. y'all know i love Hader, and he's on my shaggy fantasy team, and even i was just rolling my eyes at the balls and strikes. total joke.

[pops 6980]

Kyle gibson was on the ticket a couple weeks ago and they asked him about this. He actual said right now he'd prefer humans to machines. 

Said the current tech measures the ball at the very front of the plate (don't know how accurate that is) and that it would lead to batters moving way up in the box. 

Said that while there are certainly wrong calls he doesn't think it's that big of a deal and evens out in the end. 

Interesting take from a guy who does it for a living. 

Maybe he has to say that to not piss off umps?

[Guest]

On 6/28/2021 at 3:39 PM, Wulaw Horn said:

For those who think that offense will skyrocket 2 things:

1) not necessarily as in the aggregate there are tons of umps who refuse to call high or low strikes which is as important as left to right; and

2) if they balance in the game gets out of hand it’s a really easy fix- they can then recalibrate the strike zone (and the machine) until they get a balance between offense and defense that they like. This would be huge. 

Why recalibrate?  Call the pitch 

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, pops said:

Kyle gibson was on the ticket a couple weeks ago and they asked him about this. He actual said right now he'd prefer humans to machines. 

Said the current tech measures the ball at the very front of the plate (don't know how accurate that is) and that it would lead to batters moving way up in the box. 

Said that while there are certainly wrong calls he doesn't think it's that big of a deal and evens out in the end. 

Interesting take from a guy who does it for a living. 

Maybe he has to say that to not piss off umps?

Whatever current tech might be, I bet it doesn’t give a fuck about the catcher’s framing of the pitch/ baseball’s flop; and for that I’d be grateful 

Never mind umpires calling bullshit to reward shitty pitchers or punish batters with whom they have grudges. 

Edited July 9, 2021 by slorch