Washington Nationals: Umpire Paul Schrieber and the PitchF/X Strike Zone
by natsstats on Apr 13, 2010 1:05 PM EDT
Email
PrintMonday, Manager Jim Riggleman was ejected for arguing balls and strikes with plate umpire Paul Schrieber. To those watching the game, it appeared that Schrieber was favoring the Phillies, and squeezing Nats Pitcher Jason Marquis. I pulled the PitchF/X data from the game to check the facts.
The problems behind the plate started in the bottom of the third inning. Jason Marquis threw a change-up to Carlos Ruiz on a 0-2 pitch. According to PitchF/X the ball crossed the plate 4 inches above Ruiz' knees. The center of the ball was 8 inches from the center of the plate, meaning the entire baseball was over the white part of the plate. Schrieber called this pitch Ball 1 instead of Strike 3, and Ruiz ultimately walked. Fortunately for the Nats, Cole Hamels grounded into a double play and the Nats got out of the inning without letting up a run. Still, it set the tone for what followed.
The real frustration set in 22 pitches later. In the top of the fourth, Josh Wilingham was at the plate with runners on 1st and 2nd. The count was 3-2. Willingham took a fastball that, according to PitchF/X, was thigh high, and 2 inches further from the center of the plate than the pitch Ruiz took the prior inning. Of course, umpire Paul Schrieber called this strike 3 on Wilingham. The Nats still scored 3 that inning, but the out kept a big inning from becoming a blowout inning.
In top of the fifth inning, an illegal pitch was called on Marquis for going to his mouth without rubbing his hands on his pants. Coincidentally, this resulted in ball four to Chase Utley, bringing Ryan Howard to the plate with runners on first and second - one out. With a 1-2 count on Howard, Jason Marquis threw a slider. PitchF/X shows this pitch to over the white part of the plate, approximately 2 inches below Howard's knees. This pitch was called a ball, and Howard ultimately hit an RBI single which moved Utley to third. Riggleman went to the mound, waited for Schrieber to break up the conference, and proceeded to tell Schrieber how much he appreciated his day's work behind the plate.
To be fair, Schrieber hadn't called a low strike all day, and the pitch to Howard was a little below the knees. At the same time, the data shows that Schrieber had been screwing with the Nats for an inning and a half.
If MLB umpires continue to favor teams, MLB needs to step in and use technology (like PitchF/X) to call balls and strikes. Keep the plate umpire to call fair/foul balls, catcher/batter interference, and outs at the plate.
Of course, it could be that MLB wants the umpires to promote some teams and players over others. So what do you think? Does MLB protect some teams at the expense of others? Do some players get star treatment at the plate? If that's the case, what defines a star?
35 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
no doubt....mlb has some really lame issues .......that ruin the quality of the game experience
- the umpires who can be more argumentative than the player/coach/mgr….
-the strike zone
-the brawls where players not only come off the bench …but worse, trot out of the bull pen…
CRAP ! I agree with you Mamba...
The worst it the trotting of the lame a## pitchers from the bullpen and how about the ball boys, too. I mean really!!
Innovation ...
Is it possible for the Pitch/FX system to be set up so an ump can just look down at a wireless device and call them fare and square…. ?
iPhone is his pocket? Can you imagine? Why not just do them all that way...
And he can sit behind home and out of the way of the play, and finally stop breathing down the catcher’s back, or even worse for someone who once caught, leaning his lazy a$$ on my shoulder during every pitch…
I don’t know if this would work, actually, but it’s interesting…
Gameday is pretty up-to-date, but probably not quick enough for pitch-by-pitch in-game analysis…
Vivian Jaffe: "Have you ever transcended space and time?"
Albert Markovski: "Yes. No. Uh, time, not space... No, I don't know what you're talking about."
by Patrick Reddington on Apr 13, 2010 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I’ve been asking this for years. The technology exists to accurately call balls and strikes without humans screwing with the outcome of the game. Instant, and perfect. Measure every player at the beginning of the season. Pick what really is the strike zone, and everybody knows the dimensions of home plate.
We can shoot a freaking missile through a window of a building from thousands of miles away…why can’t we have a franking computer accurately call balls and strikes. No more agendas.
Heck, do like tennis and football and hockey and even basketball in certain situations. Use replay to get the call right. Give each team 5 ball and strike challenges. I bet it umpires knew they could be overruled, they’d call a better game.
There…we just solved the problem.
I like the human effect of umpires, to a point.
I would like to see ML experiment with a system like in tennis, where a laser/optical sight can signal a BEEP when the ball crosses over the black. It should be relatively easy to implement, and the job of the home plate ump will become much easier.
Rob
"Man may penetrate the outer reaches of the universe, he may solve the very secret of eternity itself, but for me, the ultimate human experience is to witness the flawless execution of a hit-and-run." -- Branch Rickey
The technology has existed for 25 or so years
Manufacturing has been using it to automatically identify and remove irregular products off the belt before products are wrapped and shipped. Maybe we could use it to identify and remove irregularly shaped umps
Relax, all right? Don't try to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
I'm probably in the minority here, but I like the "human factor" umpires provide.
Nobody is perfect — sometimes the calls go your way, sometimes they don’t. The goal should obviously be equal treatment for both teams, favoring nobody, but calls are going to be missed here and there. I enjoy seeing managers get fired up and ultimately tossed… it gives me a reason to yell.
Let umpires be umpires
In the Nationals television broadcast, I think that Carpenter and Dibble had it right: the issue is not that the umpires are making mistakes, but that they are being expected to be like machines, and they are being measured against an “objective” standard.
Umpires make mistakes… we know that… and I think that is OK. They even out in the end. But the problem is becoming that the umpires are having trouble reconciling their intuitive understanding of the strike zone and the “objective” standard of the technology. I think that was pretty clearly demonstrated yesterday.
By the time an umpire makes it to the majors, there is nothing that anyone can say about their understanding of the game – they are far and away the best arbiters of all of the rules, not just balls and strikes. The only thing the technology does is make the most qualified experts in their field question their own judgement.
Interesting stuff, natsstats...
…even more interesting might be to see whether the effect is systematic: rather than a few obvious “outliers,” like you note in your article, what is the strike zone like for Nats vs. other in the same game? Could you construct a notional “observed strike zone,” for each pitcher, perhaps determining the edges by the point at which a pitch has a 50% chance of being called a strike? Sample size will be an issue, of course. Hmm, this kind of sounds like (geeky) fun. Can you give me a pointer to how to download pitch f/x data, myself? I haven’t worked with it before.
"And everybody lived happily ever after. Except the Phillies and the Mets. The End." --Sasskuash
Friend of Dukes and Desmond #3
I did some research last February regarding Nats pitchers' success vs MLB umpires
Here’s the link to the post:
http://natsstats.wordpress.com/2010/02/19/2009-umpire-review/
Relax, all right? Don't try to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
Hee, hee...
…love your “Annual Joe West Deadly Combination of Arrogance and Ignorance Award.” Does Joe West manage to win it every year? I remember Fletcher’s “I’m late for dinner” call… I thought Ecky was going to go on a tri-state rampage.
"And everybody lived happily ever after. Except the Phillies and the Mets. The End." --Sasskuash
Friend of Dukes and Desmond #3
There is a difference between human factor errors and outright bias
With technology such as PitchF/X is would be very simple to detect bias either for or against a team or even pitcher. You need not interject the technology into the game to use it to make for a better and more fair experience for fans and players.
Although the umpires union would never allow it, you could start measuring and publishing the accuracy of how balls and strikes are called by each umpire. This would very quickly result in there being a much more standard and consistent strike zone throughout baseball. It still leaves the human component in the game but gives the league a fair and unbiased way to enforce consistency and eliminate bias.
With data from only a few games it would be very easy to detect when an umpire is calling balls/strikes with any type of bias. While you would never be able to prove or disprove bias over a few pitches or even a couple of innings, over a handful of games and certainly over the duration of a season it would be simple to prove any bias.
It seems like a no brainer to me which pretty much guarantees that baseball will not even consider it for a moment.
(2)
My point is...
Bad calls appear to be on the increase, or is it that the technology exists for us to now be able to tell umpires are making errors? It that tech exists, why not use it. Don’t limit challenges to home runs. Make a couple challenges available per game. Caught steeling. Foul tips. non-force calls at the bases.
They should be making accurate calls and we shouldn’t even know they are there. If they know there are consequences, they will try harder to be right.
Pitch selection and adjustments
The umpires are not calling the game in favor of other teams. That seems like sore-loser conspiratorial talk that has very little basis in fact. Honestly, I’d avoid it if possible, because even if you believe it, it causes people who aren’t sold on your crusade to be suspicious and take what truthful statements you make with a grain of salt.
The fact is, Schrieber wasn’t giving people low strikes. You even begrudgingly admitted this — the difference? Hamels adjusted. He still pitched like crap, and looked very weak out there. Why don’t you post Marquis pitch selection? He threw a lot of sinkers, which aim for a low strike, and you just were not going to get those Monday afternoon. By the fourth inning, he should have known this, but he kept going back to that pitch. Second time through the Philly line-up, the batters knew they could lay off of his sinker and get a ball, but Marquis refused to make adjustments.
If you want a reason for why the Nationals lost on Monday, perhaps looking at Marquis/Rodriguez’s pitch selection rather than some vast conspiracy because Bud Selig and every umpire in baseball is in cahoots to keep the Washington Nationals down.
by JamesFromPhilly on Apr 13, 2010 3:19 PM EDT reply actions
Wait a sec
If Marquis’ best pitch is his sinker (it is) and he’s throwing it for strikes (he was) then he should be getting the strike calls. Umpires shouldn’t have the power to make pitchers throw their second-best pitches just because they don’t like to call certain types of pitches correctly.
Rob
"Man may penetrate the outer reaches of the universe, he may solve the very secret of eternity itself, but for me, the ultimate human experience is to witness the flawless execution of a hit-and-run." -- Branch Rickey
On the other hand
The idea that the Nationals are the victims of systematic bias is very difficult to prove and, as you say, won’t get much traction at all without said proof.
Rob
"Man may penetrate the outer reaches of the universe, he may solve the very secret of eternity itself, but for me, the ultimate human experience is to witness the flawless execution of a hit-and-run." -- Branch Rickey
He was getting strikes first time through the Philly line-up on swings. Second time through, they laid up on his low stuff. Marquis did not make adjustments.
by JamesFromPhilly on Apr 13, 2010 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions
You are aware of Marquis' history as a sinker/ground ball pitcher, right?
They tend to work down in the zone…
Vivian Jaffe: "Have you ever transcended space and time?"
Albert Markovski: "Yes. No. Uh, time, not space... No, I don't know what you're talking about."
by Patrick Reddington on Apr 13, 2010 3:27 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Sucks for him?
This is why it’s good to have a repertoire of out pitches. Marquis wasn’t gonna get that out on Monday, and neither would Hamels, or Baez, or Madson. Or Halladay even, if he were pitching. At a major league level, pitchers and batters need to be able to adjust.
by JamesFromPhilly on Apr 13, 2010 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Balderdash
At that level, umpires need to call the zone correctly.
Rob
"Man may penetrate the outer reaches of the universe, he may solve the very secret of eternity itself, but for me, the ultimate human experience is to witness the flawless execution of a hit-and-run." -- Branch Rickey
Marquis “THOSE SHOULD HAVE BEEN STRIKES” were borderline pitches. They were right on the very edge of the strike zone. He got squeezed, but he — and the batters — knew those borderline calls on the line were going to be balls.
by JamesFromPhilly on Apr 13, 2010 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions
+1
James from Philly is right. Hamels adjusted. Marquis did not. if you look at Marquis’ pitch result chart, he got swinging strikes on the low pitches in the first three innings and the Philly hitters adjusted. Marquis did not.
the ump’s strike zone was consistant between pitchers, despite Bob and Dibs’ protestations.
Your voice of doom and gloom. Read more at natsnewsnetwork.blogspot.com
by Dave at District Sports Page on Apr 13, 2010 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions
How is he supposed to "adjust"...
When he’s just discovering that the zone is small and not low?
It’s too late by then. He’s already put a buttload of baserunners on for the meat of the Phillies’ order. It’s ridiculous.
A strike zone simply should not be that minuscule. Period.
The strike zone was consistent
Through the entire game, for both teams, the strike zone was consistent. The difference? The Phillies stopped biting on his low junk.
Check out the game on http://brooksbaseball.net/
The bullpen for the Nationals seemed to have no problem locating. Marquis did not adjust to the Phillies’ own adjustments second time through their line-up. Really, Marquis is just not a very good pitcher, but you probably do not need me to tell you that.
by JamesFromPhilly on Apr 14, 2010 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions
You don't seem to understand
Marquis throws a sinker. He is effective with his sinker when it is properly called a strike. It’s not about the opposing batters swinging at low stuff, it’s about getting the calls when he throws strikes. Sinker balls do not work unless they are at the bottom of the zone. If he has to throw three inches higher to get the ump to call a strike, then he gets hit hard.
You say that a “good” pitcher would throw something else in this situation… What would you say if some umpire was not able to properly call a cut fastball a strike? Should Mariano Rivera be forced to throw something else? He lives and dies by that one pitch. This doesn’t make him a bad pitcher, does it?
Rob
"Man may penetrate the outer reaches of the universe, he may solve the very secret of eternity itself, but for me, the ultimate human experience is to witness the flawless execution of a hit-and-run." -- Branch Rickey
RBS, you're mistaken here
It’s not about the opposing batters swinging at low stuff, it’s about getting the calls when he throws strikes.
that statement is wrong. it IS about getting the hitters to swing at your low stuff. otherwise, he’d be throwing balls all day and walking everybody.
Marquis has to throw sinkers because his fastball isn’t good enough to get anyone out. usually he’s trying to fool guys into swinging at pitches out of the strike zone. when he can do that, he’s effective. when he can’t he’s going to get hit. hard. it’s why he has sucha low ceiling, despite the Nats trying to make him a top of the rotation starter.
the diff between Marquis and Rivera is that you can’t tell the difference between Rivera’s cutter and his fastball out of his hand. apparently, the Phils figured Marquis out. it’s not that hard to understand. lots of teams have been able to figure out Marquis.
close pitches low were not called all day. the other pitchers adjusted. the bullpen adjusted. Marquis did/could not.
Your voice of doom and gloom. Read more at natsnewsnetwork.blogspot.com
by Dave at District Sports Page on Apr 14, 2010 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm not sure why I'm not being understood here
Yes, I know that the Phillies came to be patient enough to avoid swinging at Marquis’ low pitches. I’m not calling the umpire out about that. (It seems odd to even type that out). I’m also not saying Marquis pitched well or anything else. I have one and only one point: the umpire should call pitches at the knees, because that’s the defined strike zone.
Rob
"Man may penetrate the outer reaches of the universe, he may solve the very secret of eternity itself, but for me, the ultimate human experience is to witness the flawless execution of a hit-and-run." -- Branch Rickey
Hamels has issues all his own yesterday...
And as mentioned here and elsewhere, both bullpens were able to work with the ump’s zone and have success, what I questioned was just saying he should stop doing what he’s been doing his whole career. Is he one-dimensional with no real out pitch? Sure.
Vivian Jaffe: "Have you ever transcended space and time?"
Albert Markovski: "Yes. No. Uh, time, not space... No, I don't know what you're talking about."
by Patrick Reddington on Apr 13, 2010 3:43 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I’m not contending that the Natinals are victims here – I am speaking about baseball in general. I don’t think that it is possible to make the argument that the strike zone is called consistently between leagues or umpires.
My point is that you could use the technology that is readily available to assess umpire performance without having it actually on the field. Major league umpires didn’t just fall into their jobs – they earned them through hard work and paying there dues and if their performance were to be evaluated in part by measuring the strike/ball accuracy, I would expect that most would adapt to the fixed strike zone and call the games accordingly.
Supposedly
They are getting appraised on their ability based upon ptichtrax or other similar systems. The problem is that this process is nearly invisible and no umpires ever seem to lose their job or get promoted because of these assessments.
Rob
"Man may penetrate the outer reaches of the universe, he may solve the very secret of eternity itself, but for me, the ultimate human experience is to witness the flawless execution of a hit-and-run." -- Branch Rickey
Actually, I think everyone has made valid points in this thread.
Bottom Line: Professional baseball players should be able to make adjustments to their swing when facing particular pitchers and dealing with the Ump’s calls just as pitchers need to make adjustments to their game plans when they see they aren’t getting a particular strike call.
Additionally, there should be a reasonably consistent strike zone that 1) can and will fluctuate a little here and there (the human element) but 2) should not shrink or disappear entirely during the course of a game. Having said that, I don’t think it’s right that an umpire should penalize a pitcher, hitter or catcher when they ask the umpire about his strike zone. You know, the “uh-oh, now he won’t get any calls” factor. That’s just pure nonsense especially when said player questions respectfully without showing the umpire up. That is what Marquis attempted to do yesterday and upon further reflection I think Schreiber got pissed and made Marquis pay.
Overall, I realize you aren’t supposed to argue balls and strikes but when it becomes so terribly inconsistent on those occasions when both dugouts are yelling at the umps it sorely needs to be addressed. How many times have you seen that during a game? For me, personally, that makes for a very frustrating viewing experience when the home plate umpire is so bad that both teams are getting hosed. In those instances if seems to me that the umpires actually get worse the more they are called on their inconsistencies. I don’t envy an umpire’s job, it is not an easy thing to do, but they need to remember they are “professionals” also and start acting like it.
Patiently waiting for "next year" since 1971.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Federal Baseball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
GAMETHREAD SPONSOR
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Pitcher Clayton Richard gets key pinch single in 13th after coming in 0 for 16
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ball boy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
- Man beaten by four others in Dodger Stadium parking lot
- Lance Berkman’s knee injury creates a lot of questions for Cards but also his career
- Next generation: Scott Van Slyke, son of Andy Van Slyke, hits first career homer
