Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    8,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    I think Brooks Baseball did a study and found that umpires only miss about 14% of the borderline calls.

    That's pretty ****ing good.

    That said, we need robo ump for home plate. Too many important games are decided by umps making changes throughout the game, and that can't happen. The players are the humans we are watching to make the errors, not the umps.
    I'm pretty sure that it was 14% of all calls. If I had to guess, I would think that they are about 50% wrong on borderline calls.

    This pretty good.

    http://www.bu.edu/articles/2019/mlb-...-zone-accuracy
    Last edited by thawv; 10-11-2019 at 12:49 PM.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    56,760
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    I'm pretty sure that it was 14% of all calls. If I had to guess, I would think that they are about 50% wrong on borderline calls.

    This pretty good.

    http://www.bu.edu/articles/2019/mlb-...-zone-accuracy
    that's it, and you are right, and that's far less impressive.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    9,991
    The problem with just looking at the box can be that the box on TV is two dimensional......the strike zone, by rule, is really three dimensional...not just the box they show, but a cube..........so some we perceive as bad calls actually aren't.......................but plenty still are
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    East of the Sun, West of the Moon
    Posts
    29,868
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    The problem with just looking at the box can be that the box on TV is two dimensional......the strike zone, by rule, is really three dimensional...not just the box they show, but a cube..........so some we perceive as bad calls actually aren't.......................but plenty still are
    great point.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, at least fails while daring greatly.” -- Teddy Roosevelt

  5. #20
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    8,416
    So if/when they go to automated calls, what would be the definition of a strike? Ball completely in the zone? Half in? In at all?

  6. #21
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    43,888
    Quote Originally Posted by IHateTheSkins View Post
    So if/when they go to automated calls, what would be the definition of a strike? Ball completely in the zone? Half in? In at all?
    Only time will tell.

    "there's no scraps in my scrapbook"

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    East of the Sun, West of the Moon
    Posts
    29,868
    Quote Originally Posted by IHateTheSkins View Post
    So if/when they go to automated calls, what would be the definition of a strike? Ball completely in the zone? Half in? In at all?
    What is the ruling on foul balls and the chalk line? If it hits, its in. I guess thats where the conversation starts at least.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, at least fails while daring greatly.” -- Teddy Roosevelt

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    9,991
    if it's tripping an electronic sensor that it's in the zone, the sensor would have no distinction in the amount of ball tripping it.....it'd either be tripped or it wouldn't.............same way they're SUPPOSED to be called now
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    East of the Sun, West of the Moon
    Posts
    29,868
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    if it's tripping an electronic sensor that it's in the zone, the sensor would have no distinction in the amount of ball tripping it.....it'd either be tripped or it wouldn't.............same way they're SUPPOSED to be called now
    So... would the effect be to make the k-zone larger than it might be called now if 99% of the ball is outside the zone but the 1% inside trips it?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, at least fails while daring greatly.” -- Teddy Roosevelt

  10. #25
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Dugmet View Post
    So... would the effect be to make the k-zone larger than it might be called now if 99% of the ball is outside the zone but the 1% inside trips it?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    For me it makes the most sense for it to be a strike if 50% of the ball or more is in the zone. So they should reduce the k zone to the point that if 1% of the ball is in the zone and trips it, it would be the same is if 50% is in the size it is now. If that makes sense.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,439
    Exactly. It's not like the mlb wouldnt control the strike zone. They can decide the zone is whatever they want.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    East of the Sun, West of the Moon
    Posts
    29,868

    What is the graphic box next to the batter on TV games?

    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    Exactly. It's not like the mlb wouldnt control the strike zone. They can decide the zone is whatever they want.
    on this topic and testing of robot umps tor balls and strikes:

    ESPN

    ....Now, a caveat: As the beta testing in the Arizona Fall League this month has shown, the robot ump needs work. Like, a lot of work. Breaking balls in the dirt that cut through a fraction of the three-dimensional zone have been called strikes. They look ridiculous. Hitters think they're ridiculous. Even the pitchers themselves think they're ridiculous. Before a wider institution of the automated system, Major League Baseball will need to redefine the strike zone. — espn


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, at least fails while daring greatly.” -- Teddy Roosevelt

  13. #28
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    43,888
    They beta test for a reason.

    "there's no scraps in my scrapbook"

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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