Automate ball and strike calls?

Originally Posted by bballman:

Uhhh, yeah.  How likely do you think the umpires will be paying close attention to every pitch if they know they are not making a call on pitches?  You don't think their attention will wander?  And what are they going to do, review the call of the computer on instant replay if the ump disagrees with the computer?  If that is the case, they will be reviewing the computers call, which it made in the first place.  It would be a freaking disaster.

 

This whole idea of computers calling pitches is just stupid in my opinion.  Every college level player I have ever talked to is against instant replay to start with.  I haven't even had the courage to ask them how they would feel about a computer calling pitches for them.  They would think it was the most ridiculous thing they ever heard of.

 

I don’t know how close they’d be looking, but I know dang well that if I were getting paid a minimum of $120K a year up to around $300K, I’d dang sure be paying clse attention because I’d like my job!

 

You’re making all kinds of wild guesses at worst case scenarios when there isn’t even anything in place yet. Would you care to hear some real life worst case scenarios that have taken place over the last 150 or so years that everyone knows didn’t work out? IOW, you’re looking for disasters where nothing yet exists.

 

You’re entitled to your opinion as is everyone else. But I seriously doubt you’ve talked to as many college players as I’ve talked to specifically about using technology to call pitches not swung at, and the feedback I get once the player understands what’s going on is overwhelmingly in favor of it. Ignorance always things any change is ridiculous.

 

Umpires are and always have been part of the game.  I still say when you start trying to take them out of the equation, you are fundamentally changing the game of baseball.  I'm not for it.  

 

Who’s said anything about taking umpires out of the equation? That’s the kind of misinformation that causes problems! No one I’ve heard of has ever advocated removing umpires from the game, especially when it comes to calling pitches. All we’re talking about here is helping them get more calls correct.

 

Let me ask you this. Do you really think its better for the game and everyone involved for pitches to be called incorrectly? For over 60 years I’ve seen umpires get chastised at every single game I’ve ever watched. People sitting in the Right field bleachers or in the 3^rd deck pi$$ and moan about it, let alone coaches and players. Is the fear that everyone will become bored because they’ll have no reason to b***h?

 

It won’t be me being bored I can tell you! I won’t miss the constant din going back and forth from the home team players and fans to the visitors. I won’t miss the hitters and pitchers not having the excuse that the ump’s zone stinks is the reason they failed. And I sure won’t miss coaches asking the catcher or umpire where a pitch was because they thought it was someplace else.

OK, maybe I should have said taking more and more of the decisions/responsibilities of the umpires out of the equation, not taking them totally out.  And I wonder if umpires will continue to make 120k - 300K if they are not even calling balls and strikes anymore.  Will there be a need for them to even be behind the plate anymore?  If all they are doing is judging whether a batter swung or not, or if a pitch was wildly out of the K zone as called by the computer, there is really no need for them to be back there.  Can you even imagine a baseball game without an umpire behind home plate??

 

And yes, part of the game is making adjustments.  Pitchers make minor adjustments to where an ump is calling balls and strikes.  Batters are making minor adjustments as well.  It's part of the strategy of the game.  It's part of being a good ballplayer to recognize the patterns of what is being called and being able to take advantage of that to execute your pitches to that spot.  Or to stay away from that spot.  Fans yelling and complaining about ball and strike calls is part of the charm of the game.  I don't know if I'd want to sit there during a game and not hear the chatter and the complaining and seeing batters ticked off because of a called strike 3 that was a half inch off the black.  A lot of that is what makes it fun and infuriating to watch.

 

There has never been a time in baseball history when fans did not complain about the calls of the umpires.  Whether it be safe or out, balls and strikes, fair or foul.  It is all part of the game.  And I love it, warts and all.  

 

I love watching when they put pitchFX up on the TV screen and see how close some of the calls are.  As a pitcher's dad, I love seeing it.  However, I don't want it to be a part of the actual game.  Just not right.  And that is my opinion.  You have yours.  I just hope my opinion is in the majority and this never comes to pass.  

I was against it before I was for it; now I'm against it after I was for it.

 

Call it a clash of absolutes: both sides make powerfully compelling cases.

 

For me, it finally comes down to a simple question: If handed the unilateral power to make the change tomorrow, would I do it?

 

I've decided no -- and this paraphrased comment from Coach May in a related post, is what locked me in:

 

Perfect is boring. Knowing the game isn't perfect ... that it's being played, coached and umpired by imperfect folks ... makes it perfect for me.

I love watching games with the automated strike zone on the screen. It is amazing how many balls and strikes are missed. I was always infuriated by a pitcher getting an extra 3" on the outside corner as a hitter, and as a pitcher I hated not getting the high strike. Let's get the calls right. That is the most important thing, so yes, automate the strike zone.

bbm,

 

I can tell you’re a traditionalist to the core and I truly respect that because at heart I am too. But your words show me you aren’t thinking through what you’re typing, unless you really believe all the PU does is call balls and strikes.

 

Yes, baseball is a matter of making adjustments, but why do you believe that would stop if pitches not swung at were called with a higher degree of accuracy? That wouldn’t make every pitcher or batter the same. And believe me. Fans in the bleachers will always find some to bitch and complain about because they’re unconsciously looking for ways to rationalize their team’s failures. Trust me, other things will take over being the topics of discussion.

 

Of course we all have very strong opinions because we all love the game, but we don’t all love it the same way or for the same reasons. That’s why it took so long to allow that 1^st foray into IR for baseball. But as it was looked at and discussed, there came a time when the naysayers couldn’t produce enough negatives to outweigh the positives. The same thing happened with this last rule change to expand IR. There was lots of discussion until the positives outweighed the negatives, then it became “law”. Now it has to be tweaked a bit, and sooner or later its gonna just become part of the fabric of the game. While that’s going on, you can bet the discussions about calling pitches not swung at are going on. Right now the negatives outweigh the positives, but as more and more is learned about it, I honestly believe that’s going to change as well.

Originally Posted by jp24:

Perfect is boring. Knowing the game isn't perfect ... that it's being played, coached and umpired by imperfect folks ... makes it perfect for me.

 

No matter what happens, baseball will never be “perfect” because the people playing it aren’t.

I thought through what I said.  I know the plate ump calls more than balls or strikes.  But, why would he need to be behind the plate to call what's left?  Umpires already look for assistance to call check swings.  The 1st or 3rd base ump could just automatically call them from where they are.  Other than major leagues, there are less than an ump per base to call plays at the bases.  One of the base umps who does not have a potential play at their base can rotate and make tag calls at the plate.  If they mess up, there already is replay to make that call.  And the 1st or 3rd base umpire can make fair or foul calls from where they are.  Why have a home plate ump standing behind the plate and subject himself to get hit by pitches if he doesn't have to be there to call balls and strikes.  It wouldn't make sense to have him right there behind the catcher when he has no role in every single pitch.  

 

As far as adjustments go, the only adjustments would be the vertical size of the zone.  The beauty (in my mind) of umpires having a slightly different zone is the pitcher trying to stretch out the outside corner.  If a pitcher can do that, he takes an advantage.  If a pitcher knows that an umpire is calling the outside pitch, a pitcher can keep pounding it and take advantage of that.  

 

A computer calling balls and strikes is just too robotic for me.  How will that even be implemented?  Will there be the PitchFX box displayed on the big screen in center field?  And every pitch will show where the ball was in relation to that box and a big STRIKE or BALL displayed on the screen?  Will the fans start watching the center field screen every pitch instead of watching every pitch at the plate?  You can't watch both.  I don't know, I just don't like it.  Might work on TV where they can just put the box next to the batter like they do now, but you can't do that at the park - unless they can project a hologram onto the field.  

 

This calling balls and strikes is just WAY different than the instant replay situation.  I don't like that either, but at least the umpires are still making the calls and maybe a couple of times a game a call is reviewed.  Every single play (yes every play, because every play of a baseball game starts with a pitch) of every single game being called by technology is just beyond comprehension.  

Originally Posted by bballman:

I thought through what I said.  I know the plate ump calls more than balls or strikes.  But, why would he need to be behind the plate to call what's left?  Umpires already look for assistance to call check swings.  The 1st or 3rd base ump could just automatically call them from where they are.  Other than major leagues, there are less than an ump per base to call plays at the bases.  One of the base umps who does not have a potential play at their base can rotate and make tag calls at the plate.  If they mess up, there already is replay to make that call.  And the 1st or 3rd base umpire can make fair or foul calls from where they are.  Why have a home plate ump standing behind the plate and subject himself to get hit by pitches if he doesn't have to be there to call balls and strikes.  It wouldn't make sense to have him right there behind the catcher when he has no role in every single pitch.  

 

What about foul tips and catcher’s interference just to name a couple, and then too, who’s gonna be the umpire who gets the changes? Naw, there’s always gonna be a PU. But I’ll bet if you said that on an umpire’s board you’d find a lot more things they do.

 

As far as adjustments go, the only adjustments would be the vertical size of the zone.  The beauty (in my mind) of umpires having a slightly different zone is the pitcher trying to stretch out the outside corner.  If a pitcher can do that, he takes an advantage.  If a pitcher knows that an umpire is calling the outside pitch, a pitcher can keep pounding it and take advantage of that.  

 

Well, by any measure the CALLED strike zone doesn’t have corners. Everything on the edges is fuzzy. Also, no matter what people believe, pitchers just don’t have the kind of accuracy that allows them to “paint” a corner, or “pound” the same spot over and over.

 

A computer calling balls and strikes is just too robotic for me.  How will that even be implemented?  Will there be the PitchFX box displayed on the big screen in center field?  And every pitch will show where the ball was in relation to that box and a big STRIKE or BALL displayed on the screen?  Will the fans start watching the center field screen every pitch instead of watching every pitch at the plate?  You can't watch both.  I don't know, I just don't like it.  Might work on TV where they can just put the box next to the batter like they do now, but you can't do that at the park - unless they can project a hologram onto the field.  

 

Fine. You certainly aren’t alone, but the numbers on your side are slowly dwindling. I don’t know how it WOULD be implemented, but I do know there’s a lot of people talking about it looking into it. Personally, I can see a scenario where its done without anyone other than the umpires and MLB knowing about it.

 

This calling balls and strikes is just WAY different than the instant replay situation.  I don't like that either, but at least the umpires are still making the calls and maybe a couple of times a game a call is reviewed.  Every single play (yes every play, because every play of a baseball game starts with a pitch) of every single game being called by technology is just beyond comprehension.  

 

Do you really believe the calls are only getting reviewed a couple of times each game? You really need to find out more about what’s going on.

 

I don’t mean this in any kind of mean or condescending way. I understand your position, but its one based more on the fear of the unknown and change than evidence that it won’t be better for the game. But its all good. I’m thinking that as more and more information comes out about the technology involved, how its used, and how it would be worked into the game, more and more folks like yourself will come at least to the point of waiting to see it before they judge it.

 

Stats, you have to be THE  most condescending, arrogant poster on this board. Every argument I make is, at some point in your post, countered by a statement that I don't know what I'm talking about or saying that I'm not informed about baseball issues. I need to go back to not responding to any post you are involved in.

At the risk of staying involved in this conversation, how many games have you seen where umpires went to instant replay more than 2 or 3 times to decide a call during the course of a game?

I'm just going to leave this with I think that a computer calling balls and strikes in a game is not at all what I want to see become a part of the game.

Originally Posted by bballman:

Stats, you have to be THE  most condescending, arrogant poster on this board. Every argument I make is, at some point in your post, countered by a statement that I don't know what I'm talking about or saying that I'm not informed about baseball issues. I need to go back to not responding to any post you are involved in.

 

I’m sorry you feel that way, but I’m not trying to do anything other than say there’s no reason to dismiss it happening until there’s more information to make a judgment on. Not one person in authority has made any statement about it other than saying it will not happen this season. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t being considered, because it is, and a heck of a lot of $$$$ is being spent looking into it.

 

At the risk of staying involved in this conversation, how many games have you seen where umpires went to instant replay more than 2 or 3 times to decide a call during the course of a game?

 

I don’t know. I’ve watched a couple dozen ML games so far this year, but I don’t keep track of how many times it happens, and I don’t watch every second of every game. My “perception” is that it happens at least a few times every game.  

I'm just going to leave this with I think that a computer calling balls and strikes in a game is not at all what I want to see become a part of the game.

 

And I’ve tried very hard to get across that not only do I respect that opinion, at the present time it’s the majority opinion of ML owners. But the number of people having that opinion has changed over the last few years. IMHO as more people become more informed about the technology, people see that the IR now being used is working, technology as it always does improves, and MLB studies it more, we’ll see the majority opinion change. Maybe not the majority opinion of lay people like ourselves, but the majority opinion of the only people who count, and that’s the 30 ML owners.

 

10 years ago virtually no one wanted to see IR in baseball, but that’s changed dramatically. My guess is, the majority of lay people don’t want what was instituted this season, but its here, being used, and gonna stay. I’m confident the same thing’s gonna happen with calling pitches not swung at. It won’t happen in the next few years perhaps, but I think the odds of it happening in my lifetime have gotten a lot better in the last few years.

 

For those who haven’t read it, here’s the official MLB info on reviewing plays.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/officia...es/replay_review.jsp

 

That was a civil post stats. I don't mind you having a different opinion than me. Not sure why you say stuff like -

"Do you really believe the calls are only getting reviewed a couple of times each game? You really need to find out more about what’s going on."

And when I ask you about it, you don't have an answer. Apparently, you don't know what's going on either?

And this comment -

"I understand your position, but its one based more on the fear of the unknown and change than evidence that it won’t be better for the game."

Those are personal attacks. The first one you don't have an answer to, the second is just your opinion that it will better the game. It doesn't mean my opinion is based on fear or ignorance. It means I think it will have a consequence to the game that I don't think I will like.

Originally Posted by bballman:

That was a civil post stats. I don't mind you having a different opinion than me. Not sure why you say stuff like -

"Do you really believe the calls are only getting reviewed a couple of times each game? You really need to find out more about what’s going on."

 

I said that because I’m one of those guys who spends a lot of time watching this game and looking at the numbers, then comparing those numbers to what people PERCIEVE has taken place. Those things very often aren’t the same thing. Prolly in general they share the same tendencies, but that’s not the same as being the same.

 

In this particular scenario, I admit that I have no personal knowledge one way or the other, but am more than willing to accept whatever is actually taking place. I’m sure there’ll come a time when MLB  releases the data on how many challenges there were, how many reviews, and very likely what inning they took place in, as well as a whole bunch of other things. If it turns out I’m wrong an there’s only 1 review a game on average and less than 1 challenge, I’ll have to accept that something else is taking place than I perceive.

 

And when I ask you about it, you don't have an answer. Apparently, you don't know what's going on either?

 

You asked me about my personal experience and I was honest about it. I truly don’t know and doubt that anyone does right now.

 

And this comment -

"I understand your position, but its one based more on the fear of the unknown and change than evidence that it won’t be better for the game."

Those are personal attacks. The first one you don't have an answer to, the second is just your opinion that it will better the game. It doesn't mean my opinion is based on fear or ignorance. It means I think it will have a consequence to the game that I don't think I will like.

 

 If you took it as an attack, I can’t help it because that’s not how it was intended. So far you haven’t said anything that shows me you have a good understanding of the technology, how its being used, or the system in place. That’s ok though because that’s the same position most folks are in because its so new. I know I sure don’t have a good grip on what’s going on because I’m not privy to the MLB decisions and memos they send out.

 

But I’ve learned that changes often take time to fully comprehend, In that light, I haven’t even made up my mind about the extended IR yet, and it’s a rule! Why would I make up my mind about calling pitches not swung at when all it is at the moment is random thoughts in a lot of different people’s minds.

 

What I’m positive will work in calling pitches not swung at will be the technology. Its already proven that if its calibrated correctly it can consistently call a pitch within a half-inch. No human being can even approach that. What’s gonna be the problem is how to implement it. Us human being have proven over and over again that we’re pretty bad at implementing new things.