Analyzing Catchers

What type of catcher's mitt do you use?

Make and model

Bob

One aspect of catching that doesn't get enough airplay is blocking balls. I find it interesting while watching an MLB game to hear the announcer say the catcher did a great job of blocking this or that ball yet when they replay at slow motion it shows the ball being blocked yet the mitt is off the ground leaving a hole between his legs. I don't think of that as a great job. The catcher was fortunate the ball came up.

If you want to analyze this particular skill count the number of balls behind you after taking 100 reps. The goal is ZERO. You'll be tired.

This past summer I got a bit more involved in catcher metrics than in the past and come up with the following.

http://www.infosports.com/scorekeeper/images/cat2.pdf

The 1^st page is pretty simple. Each catcher is broken down by the pitchers he caught for, and the situations they made bad pitches in. The next page was how our team did vs opponents. The last 2 pages show what happened in each game.

The trick is, people need to understand that every “bad” pitch isn’t necessarily eligible for a block. If there aren’t any runners on, it doesn’t matter because no runner can advance, unless the pitch happens with 2 strikes and 2 outs, or 2 strikes and no runners on.

Stats..the poster is asking what he should be looking for when he videotapes himself. Specifically receiving. Nobody is asking about how you analyze catchers. Let's not derail another thread with your crusade on figuring out numbers in relation to what is happening on the field. There is another thread about the "odds" of playing at the next level; I think that one is more suited for what you do. You know, percentages and all that stuff. 

You need the basics, blocking, footwork, etc on which I'm no expert. Something that isn't talked about that much, though, is pitch framing (and more generally, body/movement control when receiving), which is a hugely valuable skill at the highest levels, and those guys likely learned it (whether consciously or not) long before they went pro.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9275754/, for a start.

Ubersense is a nice program. I've used it to analyze hitters. But it has an inherent flaw, which is that cell phones and tablets are not fast enough to get a really good look at baseball activities. To really stop motion effectively, you need a high speed camera like the Canon Elixim line.   The other problem is that you can only analyze what you know. For example, if you're on the balls of your feet when you receive the ball, you probably can't analyse that or correct it yourself, because if you knew better, you wouldn't be doing it that way to begin with.  So it sounds like you  might benefit from seeing a catching coach. If that's not possible,  maybe you should look at websites and videos. I recommend the New England Catching camp site and their DVD.  http://www.catchingcamp.com/.  That was a great resource for me when I was coaching LL.  Lots of drills, lots of basic instruction.  There are plenty of other catching instructors with YouTube channels.

Ubersense can do 60fps with current iPads and minis, and phones back at least as far as the 5.  I think the 5s can do 120fps.

I have an iPad 2.  Apple says the camera is 30fps.  If I look at my  kid hitting off the tee in Ubersense, a swing is composed of about 7 frames. Not bad, but not great.  It's important to shoot in full daylight, BTW, or there will be a lot of blur. 

If you compare that to a true hi-speed digital, it's not even close. Search for a You Tube user named "laflippen".  He has posted a LOT of videos of pitching and hitting mechanics, mostly shot at Giants games.  Really good stuff.

Receiving....so dependent on good set-up plus some natural ability to have soft hands although there are a lot of drills to work on receiving softly such as receiving a bucket of balls 6 to 10 feet away, bare handed. Focus on a low target (knee height) with elbow slightly outside of thigh.  Nice hinge of elbow back toward body on pitch delivery, so can efficiently move toward ball to receive it softly as the pitch won't be straight at your target set-up.

Blocking.....glove buried in the 5 hole is so key with a focus on good angle of chest along with focusing on movement laterally to block with good form to funnel ball back toward plate.

Footwork on throws....this is so critical and sometimes overlooked in shortening transition time (and lowering overall POP time).  Work on and view your correct foot placement whether the ball is up the middle, inside or outside.  Ensure start of glove to hand transfer is in front of you as you start the footwork instead of when your footwork is almost complete.

My 14 YO son has worked hard to become a catcher; that is, not a kid behind the plate playing catcher.

His catching instructor really focuses on catchers not giving away marginal strikes and being able to sell a marginal strike. He also views the catcher as an on-field pitching coach in that he should get to know each pitcher very well and how to get the best out of them, whether by a confidence-inspiring mound visit or staying away from what pitches/locations are not working. He is much less concerend with pop time and blocking or picking, but WHEN to block or pick. Etc.

Can't help with analyzing video and related software and hardware issues. Good luck.

James G,

Would you please point out where the OP talks about videotaping himself?

There are many different ways one should use when attempting to analyze performance. Video is one way, measuring that performance is another.

Batty67,

I got the distinct impression this catching coach is teaching catchers how to call a game. That’s the same way my son’s pitching instructor taught him to pitch. I believe that’s the way it should be done, but I have to ask if your boy is given a free hand in games to ply what he’s been taught.

In his post he said he is using Ubersense.  That is a videotaping/recording app designed for athletics-so you can videotape things, break it down, add notes, etc.  So he is talking about using Ubersense to watch what he is doing, and asking for pointers on receiving.

James G,

Maybe this is being picayune, but in my mind it may be that he’s not using all the tools he might find beneficial. All I did was suggest another method of analyzing himself. Personally, I would encourage anyone to use every tool in the toolbox. If you don’t believe that’s the way to go, so be it.

an easy way for you to get some very good feed backs to go to basebypros.com, this is a very inexpensive site ($49.00 for a years subscription) build your profile. you then can up load your video for a pros review and feed back. they have over 50 MLB players that donate there time to the company to give back to the game.  They review your video and then send you a detailed review that goes with the video you upload.  these guys are here to help kids with all aspects of the game. Heath Bell, Joe Kelly, Darwin Barney, Eric Sogard have reviewed some of my players videos. Its worth looking into. Good Luck and keep working hard, because if your not somebody else is and he will take your job!

My motto is "the only good block is the one where the runner did not advance." Sometimes there are pitches that are tougher than normal or take tricky hops, and quick adjustments need to be made that are out of the perfect form when blocking. The key to blocking is to make a choice toward committing yourself to blocking the baseball. If you are anticipating the ball in the dirt and are willing to sacrifice the body, the odds are with you. I wouldn't necessarily worry how it always looks.. but did they get the job done. 

Some things to look for while receiving are having a relaxed stance where your glove arm is not stiff and having what I call "five up." This means keeping your fingers pointed to the sky so that small wrist adjustments can be made if the ball goes left or right. Receiving should look 'quiet' and strikes need to be kept strikes. 

Also, if you are watching a catcher from behind, you really should not see their glove arm shooting out to the side. Everything should stay tight. And where I have received some of my best feedback was from simply asking the umpire how it looks.. since those are the people that make the ball or strike call.

The reason I like to see measurement of a skill, is because unless there’s some kind of measurement, there’s really no way to know if 1) there really is a problem, 2) how big that problem is, 3) if the teaching is working.

But how many amateur teams measure catcher blocks? Most measure only SBPct, and that’s really not a function of catching as much as pitching.

All of them.  Measuring subjectively is still measuring, and is often sufficient. And I say that as someone who's a big fan of stats in baseball.

Originally Posted by jacjacatk:

All of them.  Measuring subjectively is still measuring, and is often sufficient. And I say that as someone who's a big fan of stats in baseball.

All of them? Subjectively? I take that to mean the coach uses his gut feelings based on his perceptions to come up with a T/F answer to “The catcher is blocking sufficiently”. That works just about as well as a coach doing the same thing when considering his pitchers, hitters, or fielders. Heck, its sufficient, so obviously its all that’s needed.

Yeah, I'm sure every single coach in the country needs stats on how well catchers block balls in the dirt in order to rank the catchers on his team based on that skill.

I love stats.  I have stats for my son's teams that can tell me a lot about what they accomplished as hitters, in substantial detail.  Having attended all the games those stats were generated at, I can tell you that I wouldn't need those stats to tell you who the best and worst hitter on those teams was, and I could rank them all from worst to best without the stats with a margin of error similar to what the stats provide.

Among other things, stats are useful to inform marginal decisions, and to evaluate players where sufficient direct observation isn't possible, and as a backstop to verify if what you think you're observing is backed up by the numbers.  But to assume no one is evaluating some skill, or that the subjective evaluation they are doing is inherently worthless, because they don't have actual numbers written down somewhere is absurd.

Originally Posted by jacjacatk:

Yeah, I'm sure every single coach in the country needs stats on how well catchers block balls in the dirt in order to rank the catchers on his team based on that skill.

Well, if they want to be accurate, they do need something other than their PERCEPTIONS. However if they believe that isn’t necessary, it isn’t. It all depends on what they’re trying to do.

I love stats.  I have stats for my son's teams that can tell me a lot about what they accomplished as hitters, in substantial detail.  Having attended all the games those stats were generated at, I can tell you that I wouldn't need those stats to tell you who the best and worst hitter on those teams was, and I could rank them all from worst to best without the stats with a margin of error similar to what the stats provide.

And I say you’d be wrong. In virtually every case when someone make statements like that, I’ve proven them wrong. Not in general, but in fact. And its happened with people who are great coaches. It doesn’t mean they’re any less great, but it does mean they can’t be nearly as precise with their perceptions as the numbers are.

But again, if the object is only to be generally right, its no big deal. Heck, saying Billy is better than Tommy’s no big trick. Quantifying that difference is something else again.

Among other things, stats are useful to inform marginal decisions, and to evaluate players where sufficient direct observation isn't possible, and as a backstop to verify if what you think you're observing is backed up by the numbers.  But to assume no one is evaluating some skill, or that the subjective evaluation they are doing is inherently worthless, because they don't have actual numbers written down somewhere is absurd.

You’re exaggerating what I said in order to try to marginalize me and my thoughts. That’s precisely why using accurate stats will almost always prove to be superior to what amounts to nothing more than educated guesses. If you’re correct, why are there any metrics at all? They’re not necessary if everyone has your depth of knowledge and insight.

I’d say there was a very good chance coaches who don’t want accurate numbers are afraid to be proven wrong, and/or don’t know how to go about analyzing what they’re looking at. The shame is, its really a pretty easy thing to do, but it does take effort to learn, and it does take a great deal of time to do well.

You go on and keep denigrating me because I don’t believe gut feelings are as good as real numbers, and you go on and keep thinking all coaches everywhere always make the best decisions based on perceptions. What I’m saying has nothing to do with what I think coaches are or aren’t, but rather what’s true.

Again, I’ll leave you to you own delusions of grandeur and the belief that whatever I say is worthless. But I will leave you with this. If you don’t need stats, why do you love them so? Why do you need detail when all you have to worry about is whether player “A” is better than “B”?

Well, if they want to be accurate, they do need something other than their PERCEPTIONS. However if they believe that isn’t necessary, it isn’t. It all depends on what they’re trying to do.

Subjective analysis is often sufficient to make decisions about relative talents.  I don't need Mike Trout's and Ben Revere's numbers in front of me to tell which one of them is a better hitter if I watch them play enough.  If they were the two guys I was picking between in spring training to be my CF, I wouldn't have to look at thier numbers to tell me which one to choose.

And I say you’d be wrong. In virtually every case when someone make statements like that, I’ve proven them wrong. Not in general, but in fact. And its happened with people who are great coaches. It doesn’t mean they’re any less great, but it does mean they can’t be nearly as precise with their perceptions as the numbers are.

With absolute certainty, I can tell you observationally whether a hitter is in the best or worst quartile on one of my son's teams.  It's possible I can't definitively tell the 1st and 2nd best hitter apart, or the worst and next-to-worst, but in a lot of cases, I don't need that much precision, and the stats, being samples of actual ability, wouldn't necessarily be enough evidence to make distinctions that fine anyway.

You’re exaggerating what I said in order to try to marginalize me and my thoughts. That’s precisely why using accurate stats will almost always prove to be superior to what amounts to nothing more than educated guesses. If you’re correct, why are there any metrics at all? They’re not necessary if everyone has your depth of knowledge and insight.

You really love numbers, but don't appear to have any understanding of what they mean, or what an error bar is, or the concept of context.  Define "accurate" stats

You go on and keep denigrating me because I don’t believe gut feelings are as good as real numbers, and you go on and keep thinking all coaches everywhere always make the best decisions based on perceptions. What I’m saying has nothing to do with what I think coaches are or aren’t, but rather what’s true.

Look up the definition of strawman.  Provide a quote where I said used the term "gut feelings" or equated them to numerical analysis.  What I said was subjective measurement happens all the time, it's often sufficient to make good and rational decisions, and numbers can be used to inform these decisions, help make better ones at the margins, and work as a check against subjective error.

Specific to the nature of catching skills, Jose Molina (http://www.baseball-reference....rs/m/molinjo01.shtml) has been a substandard offensive catcher for the vast majority of his career, and by traditional measurements of catcher defense has often not made up the difference between what he's been getting paid and what he appeared to be worth. There's now a substantial body of evidence (http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9275754/), done largely after the fact, that teams were valuing him for his pitch framing abilities, and, if anything, under-paying him for his actual on the field performance.  Prior to the last couple of years, had anyone heard of any statistical evidence for pitch framing?

Again, I’ll leave you to you own delusions of grandeur and the belief that whatever I say is worthless. But I will leave you with this. If you don’t need stats, why do you love them so? Why do you need detail when all you have to worry about is whether player “A” is better than “B”?

Stats provide an interesting and useful way of understanding player performance, different from and complimentary to observation.  I also like numbers for their own sake, for their usefulness in describing the feats of baseball players and comparing them.  I also like actually watching the game for the displays of physical skill, for the sheer oddballness (statistically) of things like watching Jean Segura steal 1B, or Joe Blanton hit a homerun with a perfect swing that he's probably incapable of reproducing.

Stats are also useful for predicting performance.  And a stat on blocking balls in the dirt would be useful in evaluating catcher performance, or improving the evaluation of catcher performance.  It's just not inherently necessary to have a stat for something in order to measure it in a meaningful way.

As to delusions of grandeur, I'm quite comfortable with my abilities and shortcomings, and even my delusions.  But I will leave this here as well, since it seems to remain fitting in almost every debate with you.

...and, here we go again.

Delaware, I'm glad you were able to get some good dialog before things got derailed.

Jac, I was about to warn you... now all I can say is I see a cold compress and four aspirin in your immediate future.

Stats, regarding the countless requests by many here that you not hijack threads... oh, never mind.

No need, I should really try to avoid living out this comic, but sometimes I just get bored.

hahaha... perfect.  That could be me too... you nailed the hairline.

So as to not accidentally plagiarize, xkcd.com.  Kill a few minutes/hours.