Seitzer does it again...

[Moonlight J]

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=12965

This is a phenomenal read - not sure if you need a subscription to see the whole thing.

[Kevin Seitzer]

Thanks, Jason. It's not behind the paywall this morning, so it should be free for anyone to read.

The topic is the strike zone for the those who want to know before they click the link.

[DJBeasties]

I think Tango said it well. If there are a lack of replies, it's because people are stunned. This will be some serious reading tonight. I read throught it once but I cannot absorb this all in one read. Outstanding stuff.

[schlesinj]

I think Tango said it well. If there are a lack of replies, it's because people are stunned. This will be some serious reading tonight. I read throught it once but I cannot absorb this all in one read. Outstanding stuff.

Agreed. I need to have my coffee before I tackle this.

[B-Fly]

Great work, Mike! I think I'm more in the camp of preserving this impact of catcher/pitcher skill in expanding the zone, rather than moving to robo-umps, but you're right that it's a really valuable way to measure this aspect of catcher fielding skill. I bet there's a catcher out there who is going to ask for your help in quantifying his pitch framing skills for contract negotiations.

[Erik]

Excellent stuff.

If numbers for every pitcher, catcher and batter related to this issue are published, would that change the way the umps approach their strike zone with certain players? Or is the "adjust the zone to how the catcher positions himself" tendency simply too hard-wired into the human brain to ever be downplayed?

[DMT]

Great article Mike, kudos!

[Kevin Seitzer]

Thanks, guys.

If numbers for every pitcher, catcher and batter related to this issue are published, would that change the way the umps approach their strike zone with certain players? Or is the "adjust the zone to how the catcher positions himself" tendency simply too hard-wired into the human brain to ever be downplayed?

I suspect that some of it is conscious. "I can't call that pitch a strike. He doesn't deserve it. The dugout would kill me. Etc." And some of it is unconscious, of which part may be mechanical and could potentially be re-trained. One of the commenters to the article was an amateur ump who said that with the inside chest protector that the umpire tends to follow the catcher's body for better protection from the pitch. If they do that in the majors, that could very well affect their zone. You could probably train the umps not to do that, but would they want to? I understand it's not easy to get in front of a 95-mph fastball.

[onejayhawk]

ALL:
Double, double, toil and trouble;
Fire, burn; and caldron, bubble.

HECATE:
O, well done! I commend your pains,
And everyone shall share i’ the gains.

MacBeth

J

[chancellor]

Astounding piece of work - clearly well-researched and succinctly well-written. I had gone away from Baseball Prospectus the last couple of years. I'm coming back.

[Grinch]

Excellent work Mike. I think there has been such an influx of new statistical info via PitchFx and the like, that deciphering what has meaning and what does not, as well as what can we do with the data is gonna take a while. Glad guys like you have tackled it head -on.