How Bad Are the Umps?

[Bellhorn04]

Extending the replay reviews to balls and strikes is probably the most we'll see in the next decade. There is a lot of resistance to robots.

[mvp 78]

Extending the replay reviews to balls and strikes is probably the most we'll see in the next decade. There is a lot of resistance to robots.

 

The resistance to change is the reason MLB's popularity is s*** with people under 50. Once the boomers die off, MLB will be struggling and you can bet there will be contraction.

[Bellhorn04]

I've made up my mind. I fully support an automated strike zone. Screwups like the JBJ at-bat with 2 blatantly wrong calls out of 4 are totally unacceptable.

[Bellhorn04]

If the 13% error rate is accurate, there are about 3 dozen blown calls per game.

[mvp 78]

I've made up my mind. I fully support an automated strike zone. Screwups like the JBJ at-bat with 2 blatantly wrong calls out of 4 are totally unacceptable.

 

One of us, one of us! Gobble gobble we accept you one of us!

[User Name]

Welcome to the light side Bellhorn. We have cookies.

[Spudboy]

Going with the automated system would seem to be a "no brainer".

[sk7326]

I disagree with 1 and 3.

 

The thing I think with #3 is not that it is a hot button issue, but that it could be quickly. Baseball has blessedly been very liberal in letting the Pitch/FX data be disseminated to the public - both via the gameday stuff as well as just for analytics. The league knows how important that stuff is to a lot of people (baseball is uniquely built for that - big part of its tradition). But you disseminate that and you are also sharing just how dreadfully, blatantly wrong the umpires are, every single night. I am not sure how long they can pretend the state of calling balls and strikes is okay when there is so much damning visual evidence.

 

Now the task is impossible. Between issues of tracking the ball flight of an 80 mph pitch (to say nothing of a 95 mph one), watching the swing of the bat, and general depth perception ... the best umps in the world can only get to (collectively) about a 6/7 level. When one sees how important the count is to the success of an at-bat, mistakes change things, all the time. Now - I understand this sort of large error margin is there in other sports - offensive line infractions in football, off-ball fouls in basketball, almost every minute of a hockey game - but there is existing, mature technology that would bring the error rate down a lot, and it could be implemented within a week.

[Maxbialystock]

No matter what the advocates for a pure strike zone--enforced by technology, not humans--say, what they really want is more calls going our way for both pitchers and hitters. We are now on page 39 of this thread, and one would be hard pressed to find a specific complaint about a call that went our way. I am of the firm belief that, were all those balls and strikes called perfectly, it would help neither our pitchers nor our hitters. Edited June 15, 2016 by Maxbialystock

[Bellhorn04]

No matter what the advocates for a pure strike zone--enforced by technology, not humans--say, what they really want is more calls going our way for both pitchers and hitters. We are now on page 39 of this thread, and one would be hard pressed to find a specific complaint about a call that went our way. I am of the firm belief that, were all those balls and strikes called perfectly, it would help neither our pitchers nor our hitters.

 

Everyone who is advocating automated balls & strikes is well aware of the fact that it would cost us calls as well. We all know Vazquez is a good 'pitch-framer'. I think you're quite wrong about what the intent is.

[Maxbialystock]

The resistance to change is the reason MLB's popularity is s*** with people under 50. Once the boomers die off, MLB will be struggling and you can bet there will be contraction.

 

Really? You know that for a fact? I would argue, for starters, that boomers are not the key demographic right now that keeps MLB flourishing. And by flourishing I mean that salaries are out of sight, attendance continues to be very good, and the TV ratings (and mlb.com ratings) are solid as well. If you look at the history of baseball, the key factor for keeping attendance up is scoring runs although making the stadiums nice with good sightlines also helps. For individual teams, of course, winning makes a difference, as does losing.

 

I would be astounded if a survey were done of fans who go and who don't go to MLB games in person, and the finding was, "I just can't stand those umpires any more. Too many missed calls on balls and strikes. That's why I stopped going to games. It's downright criminal that the owners don't fix this problem."

 

TV might be another matter, but I doubt it. I think you are on record saying you will stop watching a game if the balls and strikes are called badly, but I think you don't have much company when you do. If bad calls were provably affecting TV ratings, MLB would fix it.

 

The one thing I might agree on is the possibility that MLB would purify the strike zone--use computers or robots to call balls and strikes-- in order to be able to quickly contract it (make it smaller) if the pitching gets too dominant, which has happened before.

[mvp 78]

Really? You know that for a fact? I would argue, for starters, that boomers are not the key demographic right now that keeps MLB flourishing. And by flourishing I mean that salaries are out of sight, attendance continues to be very good, and the TV ratings (and mlb.com ratings) are solid as well. If you look at the history of baseball, the key factor for keeping attendance up is scoring runs although making the stadiums nice with good sightlines also helps. For individual teams, of course, winning makes a difference, as does losing.

 

I would be astounded if a survey were done of fans who go and who don't go to MLB games in person, and the finding was, "I just can't stand those umpires any more. Too many missed calls on balls and strikes. That's why I stopped going to games. It's downright criminal that the owners don't fix this problem."

 

TV might be another matter, but I doubt it. I think you are on record saying you will stop watching a game if the balls and strikes are called badly, but I think you don't have much company when you do. If bad calls were provably affecting TV ratings, MLB would fix it.

 

The one thing I might agree on is the possibility that MLB would purify the strike zone--use computers or robots to call balls and strikes-- in order to be able to quickly contract it (make it smaller) if the pitching gets too dominant, which has happened before.

 

World Series ratings are way down. Regular Season NFL games destroy the ratings of the World Series. Overall tv ratings have noticeably shrunk from just 10 years ago.

 

Attendance has decreased steadily since 2007.

 

The worst thing that can happen to MLB is all of the old people dying.

[mvp 78]

And to put it in perspective, the MLB on FOX game on Monday night had the same ratings as Monday Night RAW and nobody watches wrestling anymore...

[User Name]

No matter what the advocates for a pure strike zone--enforced by technology, not humans--say, what they really want is more calls going our way for both pitchers and hitters. We are now on page 39 of this thread, and one would be hard pressed to find a specific complaint about a call that went our way. I am of the firm belief that, were all those balls and strikes called perfectly, it would help neither our pitchers nor our hitters.

 

Why do you keep trying to tell other people what they think? Stick to your own POV and stop trying to assign false ones to others.

[Maxbialystock]

World Series ratings are way down. Regular Season NFL games destroy the ratings of the World Series. Overall tv ratings have noticeably shrunk from just 10 years ago.

 

Attendance has decreased steadily since 2007.

 

The worst thing that can happen to MLB is all of the old people dying.

 

Who cares about WS ratings? That's a max of 7 games and often depends on which teams are playing and how competitive the games are.

 

I looked at a wikipedia chart on team attendances and found out that 16 of 30 MLB teams have had their best attendance for a single season in one of the seasons from 2006 to the present. The other 14 had better single season attendance before 2006. It therefore seems to me that attendance is not going down.

 

Then of course there are those players salaries that keep going up. How is that possible if teams' ratings and attendance down and MLB is about to collapse?

 

FWIW, I think it is possible MLB will become less popular, but I can think of a bunch other reasons more pertinent than the so-called error-rate by home plate umpires.

[Maxbialystock]

Why do you keep trying to tell other people what they think? Stick to your own POV and stop trying to assign false ones to others.

 

Actually, I provided some evidence that my characterization was not, in your words, "false." My evidence is that no one on this thread or, for that matter, on any of the game threads, complains that the umpire is calling balls and strikes in our favor.

 

I am also a big basketball fan and cannot tell you how many game threads and separate threads I have read about how the referees screwed my team. I mean it gets vicious.

 

It is human nature to complain about officiating, but that doesn't mean should marginalize officials because they are an essential part of the game.

[mvp 78]

Actually, I provided some evidence that my characterization was not, in your words, "false." My evidence is that no one on this thread or, for that matter, on any of the game threads, complains that the umpire is calling balls and strikes in our favor.

 

I am also a big basketball fan and cannot tell you how many game threads and separate threads I have read about how the referees screwed my team. I mean it gets vicious.

 

It is human nature to complain about officiating, but that doesn't mean should marginalize officials because they are an essential part of the game.

 

I don't "complain" when I notice it, but I still notice it and post about it in game threads. I'll usually say that *insert Red Sox player* was gifted a ball/strike on that play.

[mvp 78]

Who cares about WS ratings? That's a max of 7 games and often depends on which teams are playing and how competitive the games are.

 

I looked at a wikipedia chart on team attendances and found out that 16 of 30 MLB teams have had their best attendance for a single season in one of the seasons from 2006 to the present. The other 14 had better single season attendance before 2006. It therefore seems to me that attendance is not going down.

 

Then of course there are those players salaries that keep going up. How is that possible if teams' ratings and attendance down and MLB is about to collapse?

 

FWIW, I think it is possible MLB will become less popular, but I can think of a bunch other reasons more pertinent than the so-called error-rate by home plate umpires.

 

That's because the MLB saw its greatest attendance in 2006 and 2007. It's been downhill since then. Also, the bump in attendance due to a new ballpark (which have been ever increasing lately) never last more than a year or two.

 

Attendance is going down year to year. Since 2007, the only year where attendance did not decrease from the prior year is 2015 (largely due to increased attendance in KC). However, attendance is shrinking again in 2016.

 

Salaries are higher, true. You know what else is higher? Pretty much everything. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/awidevelop.html

 

Is umpiring the biggest reason that MLB is fading? Nope. But it is something that could be addressed. Sticking their heads in the sand hasn't helped MLB in the past and it won't help them now.

[User Name]

Actually, I provided some evidence that my characterization was not, in your words, "false." My evidence is that no one on this thread or, for that matter, on any of the game threads, complains that the umpire is calling balls and strikes in our favor.

 

I am also a big basketball fan and cannot tell you how many game threads and separate threads I have read about how the referees screwed my team. I mean it gets vicious.

 

It is human nature to complain about officiating, but that doesn't mean should marginalize officials because they are an essential part of the game.

 

That's cognitive bias, for one, and made-up hoopla, for two. I watch a ton of MLB games and don't post my thoughts on all of them. How can you know what I'm thinking?

[Kimmi]

http://www.smartfantasybaseball.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/pitchfx1.png

 

Look at the area around the "official" strike zone.

 

 

Check out gameday yourself. It shows the "gray area" given to leeway for the umpires.

 

 

I don't know what "gray area" you're talking about. There is the 'strike zone', which is divided into 9 regions, then there is the 'ball zone' around the strike zone, which is divided into 4 regions. Each of those zones is color coded to show the batters "hot zones". There is no gray area where the umpires can call a pitch either way and be right.

 

From MLB.com:

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/shared/components/gameday/v4/images/about/hotcoldzone.jpg

 

"Use the hot/cold zones to find the pitch locations in which the current batter and pitcher perform their best, and where they struggle. The strike zone is divided into nine regions and balls are grouped into four regions, with each zone color-coded to indicate whether the batter or pitcher is hot or cold in that zone."

 

 

If you have information specifically stating that Pitch/FX gives umpires leeway in a gray area, please share the link, because I have not seen that.

[Kimmi]

They have a large impact on my enjoyment of it. Isn't that what we're talking about? A robot ump would have no impact on the game other than a consistent strike zone.

 

Well if they add to your enjoyment of the game, then by all means, advocate for them. They (meaning the nets and the troughs) don't affect my enjoyment, so you're on your own.

[Kimmi]

If the 13% error rate is accurate, there are about 3 dozen blown calls per game.

 

It is not quite that many. According to Fangraphs, in 2015, there was an average of 288 pitches thrown per game. Of those, batters swung at 46.7%. That means umpires called an average of 154 balls/strikes per game. At an error rate of 14%, that is 21-22 missed calls per game.

 

I couldn't find any data on it, but I'm guessing that the majority of those missed calls were borderline.

 

Now that said, I understand if those numbers are still unacceptable to some. I understand why some people want as close to perfection as possible. IMO, the tradeoff of accuracy for non-automated strike zones is worth it. IMO, baseball, played and umpired by people, was not meant to be perfect.

[Kimmi]

Going with the automated system would seem to be a "no brainer".

 

In terms of getting the most accurate calls, of course it's a no brainer.

 

In terms of what gives fans the more enjoyable experience, it's a matter of personal preference.

[Kimmi]

No matter what the advocates for a pure strike zone--enforced by technology, not humans--say, what they really want is more calls going our way for both pitchers and hitters. We are now on page 39 of this thread, and one would be hard pressed to find a specific complaint about a call that went our way. I am of the firm belief that, were all those balls and strikes called perfectly, it would help neither our pitchers nor our hitters.

 

I don't think that's the case Max.

[Kimmi]

World Series ratings are way down. Regular Season NFL games destroy the ratings of the World Series. Overall tv ratings have noticeably shrunk from just 10 years ago.

 

Attendance has decreased steadily since 2007.

 

The worst thing that can happen to MLB is all of the old people dying.

 

What you say about the older fans may be true, but saying that it is the result of not having automated strike zones would be a big stretch.

[Maxbialystock]

That's because the MLB saw its greatest attendance in 2006 and 2007. It's been downhill since then. Also, the bump in attendance due to a new ballpark (which have been ever increasing lately) never last more than a year or two.

 

Attendance is going down year to year. Since 2007, the only year where attendance did not decrease from the prior year is 2015 (largely due to increased attendance in KC). However, attendance is shrinking again in 2016.

 

Salaries are higher, true. You know what else is higher? Pretty much everything. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/awidevelop.html

 

Is umpiring the biggest reason that MLB is fading? Nope. But it is something that could be addressed. Sticking their heads in the sand hasn't helped MLB in the past and it won't help them now.

 

I love it because I gotcha. You can check this yourself by googling mlb attendance records and finding the wikipedia article. In it says that 10 of the 30 teams have had their highest ever single season attendance from 2008 to the present. And remember that's just 8 seasons out of an average per team of, say, 50 seasons.

 

Umpires are a problem only for people who demand perfection in what is a quintessentially human endeavor that should stay that way.

 

I agree, by the way, that a new stadium only has a temporary effect on attendance unless the old one was really crappy. You know, like Fenway Park, which I love on the TV screen but don't like at all in person--terrible sight lines, almost punitive.

[mvp 78]

Overall attendance has gone down each year. GOTCHA!

[mvp 78]

Nice try there though, champ. You'll get em next time!

[mvp 78]

Depending on your stance on Fenway, we could call it a truce though.

[Maxbialystock]

Overall attendance has gone down each year. GOTCHA!

 

Down since when? Last year was the 7th highest total attendance in the history of MLB according to a Forbes article that also says that, given every team has 81 home games (vs., what, 8 home games in the NFL), given that going to ball games of any kind is more and more expensive, and given that the overall team average is around 30,000 per game, MLB attendance is very impressive. MLB is, simply stated, flourishing. I don't know where you get your number from, but that ain't right. I'll go with Forbes, thank you. Oh, the six seasons that had better attendance than last year were, wait for it: 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2012, 2013. Looks like MLB is the sport of choice in the 21st century attendance wise. Last year the average team attendance for the season was 2.459M, which dwarfs the attendance of any NFL, NHL, NBA, or soccer team in the world.