Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    28,286
    vCash
    1500

    An interesting article on size of strike zone.

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index...zone-by-count/

    I think this is a reason we need computers calling balls/strikes.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    52,782
    vCash
    1450
    Nice little read but, nothing too shocking IMO. I always thought a 3-0 pitch was a no look strike for an ump to call even though I have no clue why it's a gimme pitch like that.

    I doubt we get computed zones any time soon however in the day and edge of modern know how nothing will shock me.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    5,198
    vCash
    1500
    It takes out the human element, says Selig.

    Haha
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    ^ESPN and PSD Agrees

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,123
    vCash
    1500
    Umpire's unions have too much pull
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    62,744
    vCash
    1500
    Bob Brenly agrees

    There's no reason to have an umpire call balls/strikes. With an automated zone, there wouldn't be any arguments behind home plate. Less ejections. Possibly, a quicker game (ok, maybe by a few seconds).

    Umpire behind home plate will still be needed for plays at the plate, etc.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,123
    vCash
    1500
    The one thing I'll say for umps..they get calls at the bases right much better than I could.

    Also, they still aren't as bad as the NBA refs.
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,683
    vCash
    1500
    I'm very intrigued by lefties getting a smaller strike zone. If robot balls and strikes were implemented, you might see the percentage of left-handed hitting batters shrink considerably.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hometown of Jerry Hairston
    Posts
    52,104
    vCash
    1500
    I just can't bring myself to wanting robot umps for balls and strikes. Everything else can be robotized (I just made up that word) but it would just feel weird having no ump behind the plate. It'll never happen anyway, not until Bud retires at least.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    52,782
    vCash
    1450
    Quote Originally Posted by gocubs2118 View Post
    I just can't bring myself to wanting robot umps for balls and strikes. Everything else can be robotized (I just made up that word) but it would just feel weird having no ump behind the plate. It'll never happen anyway, not until Bud retires at least.
    There would still be an ump for calls at the plate and such.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,297
    vCash
    1500
    Would absolutely love an automated strike zone. Would be good for the game IMO.
    Quote Originally Posted by SwatTeam View Post
    If Lebron can stretch out his arm from half court and dunk on a buzzer beater to beat the monSTARS and save planet Earth from annihilation and forced slavery with Bill Murray and Newman from Seinfeld as his teammates, then he will be considered the GOAT.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,793
    vCash
    1100
    Quote Originally Posted by gocubs2118 View Post
    I just can't bring myself to wanting robot umps for balls and strikes. Everything else can be robotized (I just made up that word) but it would just feel weird having no ump behind the plate. It'll never happen anyway, not until Bud retires at least.
    It doesn't have to look any different though. As an example, Umpires could simply have an earpiece in that beeps or something if the computer recognizes the pitch as a strike. You obviously still need an umpire back there for plays at home, catcher interference, foul tips, etc.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    28,286
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by bulldog312 View Post
    It doesn't have to look any different though. As an example, Umpires could simply have an earpiece in that beeps or something if the computer recognizes the pitch as a strike. You obviously still need an umpire back there for plays at home, catcher interference, foul tips, etc.
    I really like this idea actually.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hometown of Jerry Hairston
    Posts
    52,104
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by bulldog312 View Post
    It doesn't have to look any different though. As an example, Umpires could simply have an earpiece in that beeps or something if the computer recognizes the pitch as a strike. You obviously still need an umpire back there for plays at home, catcher interference, foul tips, etc.
    I guess, it will still be strange though. I'll probably get used to it after a while.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5,386
    vCash
    1500
    this was extremely fascinating. Good post.

    #VoteRizzo... or else

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,793
    vCash
    1100
    Quote Originally Posted by poodski View Post
    I really like this idea actually.
    I've been promoting it for about 3 years with no luck

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •