How Bad Are the Umps?

[SoxnCycles]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]364[/ATTACH]

 

 

I don't have any good pics of my 400F but here is what it looked like stock.

 

The first mass produced Cafe bike from Japan.

 

Yup, mine was red too. I've seen blue and yellow too.

My older brother rode too and I used to "borrow" his CB750 when he wasn't home.

My mom hated bikes, so when I got the 400, I had to hide it at a friends house until I was sure she wouldn't throw me out of the house for buying one.

It took 30 years, but I finally got her to go for a ride. She wasn't impressed.

[mvp 78]

While I want the right calls in the strike zone --who doesn't-- the "flavor" of the game with all this technology and new rules --like the sliding thing at 2nd base-- is kind of losing some "essentials" of the game. Probably most of old school fans are against technology while most of youmg fans are in favor. IMO the way the calls are made won't change or at least not soon, so we have to live with it whether you like it or not.

 

Blown calls shouldn't be an essential part of the game.

 

Adding additional "judgement calls" like blocking the plate or illegal slides just make it harder for the umps to do their jobs. I'm not a fan. I also don't want umps to be forced to give bench warnings over HBP's. It's just adding to much nonsense to the game. I think an official k zone monitored by a robot would make the calls clearer and wouldn't hinder the game much.

[Spudboy]

It's a shame about John.

 

Hanging with his dad sounds like a fun afternoon!

Were they originally from Mass?

 

LOL

I'm surprised I haven't seen that a on a bumper sticker yet!

 

Yes they were based in West Bridgewater where they still have a multi-line dealership.

 

They had a shop in North Attleboro where I currently reside.

 

Dick was a crusty old fart but boy could he ride!!!! And he came to Miles Standish alone with three new bikes for anyone to try out for part of the day. Great marketing.

[Spudboy]

Yup, mine was red too. I've seen blue and yellow too.

My older brother rode too and I used to "borrow" his CB750 when he wasn't home.

My mom hated bikes, so when I got the 400, I had to hide it at a friends house until I was sure she wouldn't throw me out of the house for buying one.

It took 30 years, but I finally got her to go for a ride. She wasn't impressed.

 

lol

 

I bought my first bike ( '73 Honda CL100 ) used from my best friend in the spring of my senior year in HS. I spent most of my college tuition money on it!

 

My Mom did not know! One night she came home and after parking her Pinto she came inside and asked "When is Keith going to get HIS motorcycle out of our garage."

 

I remember that about two days later or neighbor asked her how she liked MY new bike!!! Talk about s*** hitting the fan!!!

[SoxnCycles]

Yes they were based in West Bridgewater where they still have a multi-line dealership.

 

They had a shop in North Attleboro where I currently reside.

 

Dick was a crusty old fart but boy could he ride!!!! And he came to Miles Standish alone with three new bikes for anyone to try out for part of the day. Great marketing.

 

Smart man!

Thanks for the stories!

[SoxnCycles]

lol

 

I bought my first bike ( '73 Honda CL100 ) used from my best friend in the spring of my senior year in HS. I spent most of my college tuition money on it!

 

My Mom did not know! One night she came home and after parking her Pinto she came inside and asked "When is Keith going to get HIS motorcycle out of our garage."

 

I remember that about two days later or neighbor asked her how she liked MY new bike!!! Talk about s*** hitting the fan!!!

 

I hear ya.

She must have been really impressed with how you paid for it!

 

My brother ratted me out. The bastid. LOL

[Kimmi]

Improvements to the game suck!

 

I seriously hope that I won't have to read several snarky comments from you and mvp every time an ump gets a call wrong. Are people not allowed to have an opinion that differs from yours?

 

Automated strike zones would improve the accuracy of the balls and strikes calls.

 

Whether or not it "improves the game" is a matter of personal preference.

[Kimmi]

iMHO we don't need automated ball and strike calling. I agree that would take away from the character of the game. If what I hear and read is true MLB is half right in what they're doing. They're using the "K-Zone" as a tool to critique umpires after games. They now need to expand that to being sure that all umpires are improving in their ball/strike calls and if they're unwilling or unable to improve they should be out of baseball.

 

I would never advocate for 100% accuracy. That just isn't going to happen and would be unfair to the umps. I would advocate for an annual review mandating 100% accuracy on all pitches 3" or more outside the strike zone, 95% accuracy on pitches 2'-3' outside the zone, 90% accuracy for pitches 1"-2" outside the zone, and 85% accuracy for pitches 1" or less outside the zone. Any umpire who can't meet those standards should receive remedial training on the first offense and should be replaced if he doesn't meet those standards during the season after the remedial training.

 

I cannot imagine being in a job where I could tell my boss that it's ok that I only make the right decision 86% of the time because I have so many decisions to make.

 

Excellent post S5. This is what I've been trying to say.

 

Since umpires have been given Pitch/FX data on their accuracy, they have improved. One of the umpires stated that knowing what types of calls he was missing helped him to improve in that area. IMO, umpires can be trained to meet certain standards. Get rid of the bad umpires and the accuracy rate will improve.

[Kimmi]

Well yes we will always have variables but getting actual strikes right should be something they get right at the very least.

 

For me, I can tolerate a certain level of missed calls to preserve the human element of the game. The on field part of the game should not be computerized as far as I'm concerned.

 

I know that no one watches the games to see the umpires, myself included, but I do enjoy watching the hand/body gestures that some umps use when punching out a batter.

[User Name]

A 14% chance of missing a call in a crucial situation is statistically significant. #googleglassfortheumps

[Bellhorn04]

This is starting to feel like a political issue. Everybody should respect everybody else's opinion on it.

[User Name]

No. #nodiplomacy #googleglassfortheumps.

[S5Dewey]

Excellent post S5. This is what I've been trying to say.

 

Since umpires have been given Pitch/FX data on their accuracy, they have improved. One of the umpires stated that knowing what types of calls he was missing helped him to improve in that area. IMO, umpires can be trained to meet certain standards. Get rid of the bad umpires and the accuracy rate will improve.

 

This is really the crux of the whole issue. Getting rid of the bad umps. We talk about that 86% like everyone is at that level when actually that's the average of all umpires. Some are better and some are WORSE! It's impossible to know what the range is without having all the statistics but it's probably not unreasonable to think that the real range is 5% either way or 81% - 91%. That means that the worst of the umpires may be getting only getting 4 out of 5 calls right! That's horrendous when you remember that there are very few pitches (as a percentage of all pitches) that are questionable. THESE are the guys who need to be weeded out, and AFAIAC the sooner the better.

[Bellhorn04]

I seriously hope that I won't have to read several snarky comments from you and mvp every time an ump gets a call wrong. Are people not allowed to have an opinion that differs from yours?

 

 

They're a couple of incorrigible jokers, Kimmi. Just ignore it. It's not directed at you personally anyway, it's directed at the opposing side of the debate in general.

[Spudboy]

This is really the crux of the whole issue. Getting rid of the bad umps. We talk about that 86% like everyone is at that level when actually that's the average of all umpires. Some are better and some are WORSE! It's impossible to know what the range is without having all the statistics but it's probably not unreasonable to think that the real range is 5% either way or 81% - 91%. That means that the worst of the umpires may be getting only getting 4 out of 5 calls right! That's horrendous when you remember that there are very few pitches (as a percentage of all pitches) that are questionable. THESE are the guys who need to be weeded out, and AFAIAC the sooner the better.

 

But even the "Good " umps are bad. That is the point.

 

13% failure is not acceptable in any industry I ever worked in. Engineering and management usually emphasis minimizing failures. Baseball just accepts it ( for now ) because it has always been done that way.

 

Weak sauce.

[User Name]

They're a couple of incorrigible jokers, Kimmi. Just ignore it. It's not directed at you personally anyway, it's directed at the opposing side of the debate in general.

 

Kimmi really needs to stop taking this stuff personally. It's not personal. When it is, I don't dance around, as you all know.

[mvp 78]

My umps aren't directed at any particular poster. Also, I've been posting about robot umps for years on here...

[Bellhorn04]

 

Here's the GameDay capture of Bradley's AB. 2 strike calls that were indisputable balls. That's a 50% error rate on one AB.

[User Name]

That certainly enhances my enjoyment of the game.

[mvp 78]

I've just been depressed since I looked into the status of the umpire's union contract. Since it won't expire until 1/1/20, there's no way any substantial changes will be made until then. Once the Sox get rid of Buchholz, I'll be able to change my sig to Robot Umps 2020.

[Jack Flap]

After being made to endure Buchholz for a couple of games (to say nothing of Owens' control, or Wright's knuckleball), the robot ump would surely conclude that humanity needs to be exterminated from the earth to allow the planet to start anew. Do you want a machine revolution? Because this is how you get a machine revolution.

 

Therefore, I support human umpires.

[Maxbialystock]

But even the "Good " umps are bad. That is the point.

 

13% failure is not acceptable in any industry I ever worked in. Engineering and management usually emphasis minimizing failures. Baseball just accepts it ( for now ) because it has always been done that way.

 

Weak sauce.

 

Once again, thanks for your forthrightness, especially your use of terms like "engineering and management" and "minimizing failures" and "not acceptable in any industry I ever worked in." All those tell me you have a fundamental misunderstanding of baseball.

 

MLB is big business, but it is also a sport and even entertainment, but entertainment that is filled with uncertainties, which are actually the quintessence of baseball's appeal. Good, competitive teams can get to the playoffs by winning just 60% of the time. If a batter has 13% failure, he is the best batter in the history of baseball. Right now you can lead the AL in hitting if you are out 65% of the time. Pitchers, by the very nature of balls and strikes, are expected to miss the strike zone more often than hit it. They can also make a great pitch and get hit. They can throw a pitch well outside the strike zone and get hit. Hitters and pitchers both live with the near certainty that they will be inconsistent from game to game, month to month, year to year. Managers make decisions based on the best information availalble--and it is very good information--with the knowledge that the pinch hitter probably won't get a hit and the relief pitcher has a good chance of of not getting thru an inning or even a single batter. Wealthy teams can invest lots of money in players who just don't pan out, but they still have to keep paying them year after year.

 

Umpires, just like players, are not out there to be perfect because humans are imperfect. They put that hat and uniform on to indicate they are the decision makers on balls and strikes, hits and outs. Managers' and players' periodic explosions notwithstanding, it's a ball or strike or hit or out simply because the umpire says so (granted, replays have changed this somewhat). If their error rate is indeed 13%, they are the most reliable parts of the game.

Edited June 10, 2016 by Maxbialystock

[mvp 78]

I just don't see how an imperfect strike zone is an appeal to anyone, especially in terms of entertainment value. We're definitely never going to agree on this point.

[User Name]

"Fundamental misunderstanding of baseball". Lol.

[Slasher9]

i agree Max that baseball is a "fail" sport. as you point out....a batter that fails 7 out of 10 times is one of the best players in the league.

but i believe umpires to be separate from that. they are "judges" not "players". we should expect 100% from the people that enforce the rules. or as close to 100% as possible. if that means a robot helps the human umpire then so be it. i am fine with my players failing 70% of the time. i am not fine with my umpires failing 13% of the time.

[User Name]

i agree Max that baseball is a "fail" sport. as you point out....a batter that fails 7 out of 10 times is one of the best players in the league.

but i believe umpires to be separate from that. they are "judges" not "players". we should expect 100% from the people that enforce the rules. or as close to 100% as possible. if that means a robot helps the human umpire then so be it. i am fine with my players failing 70% of the time. i am not fine with my umpires failing 13% of the time.

 

It doesn't matter what people think of your grammar. This is beautiful and should be framed somewhere.

[mvp 78]

If Pedroia's fielding percentage dipped below .870, people would lose their minds. An ump blowing 13% of his/her calls is unacceptable. An ump should have a better chance calling balls and strikes than Pedroia does vs a ball hit in his area.

[Bellhorn04]

Also, it's not meaningful to say that the best hitters fail 7 times out of 10. The best hitters in history have actually only failed 6 times out of 10, if you consider getting on base a success, which you should. Furthermore, the odds are stacked to a ridiculous degree against the hitter. He not only has to beat the pitcher but 8 fielders. That is a lopsided contest.

[Spudboy]

"Fundamental misunderstanding of baseball". Lol.

 

Yeah. I don't know the game at all.

 

The new additions are such a treat to have aboard. I wonder if that guy even thought of posting without insulting me.

 

 

Alas, I am a dope who does not understand how baseball works, and I deserve to be ridiculed because everyone knows how difficult I am to get along with on this site.

[Spudboy]

i agree Max that baseball is a "fail" sport. as you point out....a batter that fails 7 out of 10 times is one of the best players in the league.

but i believe umpires to be separate from that. they are "judges" not "players". we should expect 100% from the people that enforce the rules. or as close to 100% as possible. if that means a robot helps the human umpire then so be it. i am fine with my players failing 70% of the time. i am not fine with my umpires failing 13% of the time.

 

Good stuff.

 

Not as good as your avatar, but good.