Blocks for catchers

My son is a catcher (i.e., not a kid who happens to play some catcher), and I'd like to think I've become pretty knowledgeable about this and related topics.

As you know, there are blocks and picks. Executing either with a runner on will usually prevent (or at least make it MUCH more difficult) to steal a base. Making (or not making) a good block or pick with a runner on 3B can save or lose a tight game.

On some really wild pitches, it make more sense to try and pick the ball. Knowing when to pick vs. block with runners on takes oodles of practice and experience.

Anyhow, maybe it could be defined as preventing a passed ball/wild pitch. As in, a non-routine defensive stop by a catcher with one or more runners on.

Batty67,

Actually, I’m not at all sure what you mean by a “pick”. If I had to guess, I’d say it was where the ball hit the dirt but was “caught” by the catcher as opposed to it not “caught” but kept from getting past the catcher.

From the perspective of an SK, there’s really no difference in that even if the ball is “picked” and the runner took off because he read the ball in the dirt, and made it safely to 2^nd, its still a WP, and therefore can never stop a SB.

A ball in the dirt can never be a PB in OBR, so there’s no way to prevent one other than by the catcher catching the ball. A pitch too high or wide that doesn’t touch the dirt can be a WP, but it can’t really be blocked because its no touched the dirt. It can be stopped though, and I suppose it would be ok to call it a block if it was a non-routine stop. But, it’s not really necessary that there be runners on base. If the batter can advance on a not caught 3^rd strike and there’s a pitch in the dirt, it would be a block. It could be that he picks up the ball and tags the batter-runner, he throws to 1^st base for the put out, or the batter-runner abandons the at bat.

In then end though, that does tighten up the definition.

Generally speaking in BB, the avg lay person, if asked IMO, would state or describe a "block" as an action that required the catcher to leave his feet or natural squatting position and use his/her body to stop a ball from passing.  Whereas a "pick" would simply be using the glove to stop the ball without making an attempt to utilize their body to stop the ball, more like an infielder gloving a short hop.  But, both stop the ball, when successful.  Maybe...just how I see it anyway

I think you have to figure out what balls are "blockable" and what are not.  I have seen a lot of pitches in the dirt that aren't blockable.  Either too far left or right and now on artificial surface, over the head. 

Originally Posted by Golfman25:

I think you have to figure out what balls are "blockable" and what are not.  I have seen a lot of pitches in the dirt that aren't blockable.  Either too far left or right and now on artificial surface, over the head. 

I agree that there definitely are pitches that would be impossible for any catcher to stop from getting past him, and that the lower the level the more it would happen for a lot of reasons. I don’t honestly KNOW how often that happens, but my very strong PERCEPTION is, its not something that happens on a very high percentage of the pitches thrown.

What happens on a lot of events that are so wildly away from the norm, is their very nature makes them much easier to remember because they aren’t normal. What I’m trying to say is, I suspect that if those really wild and therefore unstoppable pitches were counted, it would very likely be on one or two a game on average, where in even a “typical” ML game, there are usually at least 15-20 pitches in the dirt every game.

Pick being the skillful use of the glove to catch a ball on the hop, usually because it is not blockable (per se) or hits very far in front of plate. Either way, it is non-routine prevention of a passed ball/wild pitch.

As for how often it happens. In my experience, it varies widely by the pitcher and how tired they are. On a beautiful day, a good FB pitcher with command might only bounce a few in the dirt. On a hot day with lots of long innings, they will bounce more. A pitcher who throws lots of breaking/offspeed pitches will clearly throw more in the dirt.

Originally Posted by Batty67:

Pick being the skillful use of the glove to catch a ball on the hop, usually because it is not blockable (per se) or hits very far in front of plate. Either way, it is non-routine prevention of a passed ball/wild pitch.

I know folks get irritated when I get picayune, but its not intended to be personal, so take it for what its worth.

If a ball hits the dirt, in OBR it can NOT ever be a passed ball, so it can never prevent one.

As for how often it happens. In my experience, it varies widely by the pitcher and how tired they are. On a beautiful day, a good FB pitcher with command might only bounce a few in the dirt. On a hot day with lots of long innings, they will bounce more. A pitcher who throws lots of breaking/offspeed pitches will clearly throw more in the dirt.

You characterization is likely pretty accurate.

At the ML level, I would suspect most (upper 90%) recorded wild pitches are truly wild and not otherwise blockable by the catcher.  You're basically trying to measure whether the catcher is blocking those pitches he should be blocking. 

Originally Posted by Golfman25:

At the ML level, I would suspect most (upper 90%) recorded wild pitches are truly wild and not otherwise blockable by the catcher.  You're basically trying to measure whether the catcher is blocking those pitches he should be blocking. 

Well, I can’t say for ALL MY WPs, but I’ve scored roughly 250 ML games in the last 3 seasons, and in my experience I’d say 90-95% of all WPs could have been blocked but weren’t. That’s why the OBR rule is written the way it is about balls touching the dirt all being the fault of the thrower if something goes awry, whether it’s a pitch or a throw in the field.

So what you're saying is that all of these professional catchers who make millions can't or wont make a routine block?  And cost their pitcher a WP 90-95% of the time?  No way.  Blocking is very difficult (need to have a screw loose) and by its very nature unpredictable.  A guy can have good technique, be in the right position, and the ball still takes a funny hop. 

I think the rule is there to take out the subjectivity of the matter for record keeping purposes.  However, in most baseball organizations coaches and pitchers won't put up with a catcher who can't (or won't) block.  They call those catchers -- DH.   

Originally Posted by Golfman25:

So what you're saying is that all of these professional catchers who make millions can't or wont make a routine block?  And cost their pitcher a WP 90-95% of the time?  No way.  Blocking is very difficult (need to have a screw loose) and by its very nature unpredictable.  A guy can have good technique, be in the right position, and the ball still takes a funny hop. 

Those are your words, not mine. I’m saying trying to block or field any ball thrown in the dirt is ROUTINE, and MLB recognized that when they made the rules what they are. You seem to think that every ML catcher executes perfect technique on every opportunity, and that’s just as absurd as believing every pitcher executes every pitch perfectly, every hitter executes every swing perfectly, every fielder executes ever fielding opportunity perfectly, and every runner executes every running opportunity perfectly. It would be great if it could happen, but as long as human beings are playing the game, it never will.

Perhaps you don’t understand what you’re expecting. Catching ML pitches in a bull pen isn’t easy, but make it a game with batters in there trying to hit the ball on 120-180 pitches 162 times a season, and you’ve got one tired dude back there, no matter how good he is. I’m guess all ML catchers will just about kill themselves and risk any injury to block a ball in a meaningful situation, but every possible block doesn’t come in those situations. Its like running out balls in play. Maybe there are some players who will bust their a$$ going to 1^st on a routine GB to F4, but if they don’t and the game situation doesn’t call for it, they’re not gonna get cut.

I know its great for coaches to teach amateurs that and implore them to do it for a myriad of reasons, but that’s different than what’s expected in games.

I think the rule is there to take out the subjectivity of the matter for record keeping purposes.  However, in most baseball organizations coaches and pitchers won't put up with a catcher who can't (or won't) block.  They call those catchers -- DH.

No one’s talking about catchers who “can’t” or “won’t” block. My quick calculation is that there were 1,916 wild pitches in 2013. You’re trying to get me to believe that all but a small percentage of them came on pitches that couldn’t have been blocked, and to me that’s just ridiculous.

OakeeDoakee. I’ve pretty much done what I can about blocks, at least for the time being. This link shows one game.

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

The 1st page will break out by catcher and the pitchers he caught. The 2nd page will show our team in relation to the other teams we play.

I was really wavering as to whether or not it was worth my time to dink around with this, but this link made up my mind.

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

That’s the number of pitches in the dirt for both teams for all the games we played last season. It doesn’t include the pitches too high or wide. When you see it like that, its like a slap in the faces and should tell anyone just how hard catchers have to work.

The biggest difference between FPSB and baseball is one uses women and one uses men.  ;o)

Originally Posted by baseballmania:

The biggest difference between FPSB and baseball is one uses women and one uses men.  ;o)

Ah contraire. There are many men who play FPSB and many of the fair sex that play baseball.

Not sure what the exact rule is -  but in baseball - any pitch that hits the dirt is technically a wild pitch. Its not a subjective intrepretation thing in baseball.

Originally Posted by jhelbling:

Not sure what the exact rule is -  but in baseball - any pitch that hits the dirt is technically a wild pitch. Its not a subjective intrepretation thing in baseball.

Well, that’s true if the pitch causes a runner to advance a base or a batter to reach, and its true in all OBR base baseball, but not in NFHS based baseball. I’m not sure about SB because I’m not familiar with all of their different rules.

Back to a metric for blocks, I’ve managed to extract the data for most of our 31 games last season and I have to admit that I’m really surprised at the results. I track bad pitches during the course of the game but never really noticed how bad things got overall for the catchers.

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

To say the least, having catchers who bail out the pitchers is much more important than whether or not they can throw a runner out attempting to steal.

I think to accurately track this you would have to only count total balls in the dirt while runners are on base.  If the runner does not advance it is not a WP.  If there are no runners on, it is not a WP.  So to track how much the catcher helps the pitcher, you would track every ball in the dirt, then compare that total to how many WP's there were (ie, how many times a pitch in the dirt allowed a runner to advance).  While tracking how many pitches in the dirt a pitcher throws total is interesting, it really doesn't tell the story.  Only those pitches in the dirt with runners on base will tell you how much the catcher helped the pitcher and how effective they were blocking balls. 

Don't forget, most catchers will be much less likely to appropriately attempt to block a pitch in the dirt with no runners on because it really doesn't matter if it gets by them.  So you really can't judge their performance when there are no runners on.

Oh yeah, you can also track pitches in the dirt with 2 strikes on a batter because a WP could allow the runner to reach 1st on strike 3.  Point is, only track situations in which it matters whether a pitch gets by the catcher.

bballman,

Did you look at the metrics I presented? It should be too hard to see that when there are no runners on, its not counted as a possible block. What may not be so apparent, is that a wild pitch is not counted as a block either. So, from what I can tell, you’re saying that metric shows how effective catchers can be at blocking balls.

And BTW, I do also not count a WP that allows a batter to reach 1st as a block.

You're showing HS catchers basically blocking 80% plus of the potential WP.  So does that data contradict your earlier statements about 90-95% of WP which could have been blocked but weren't? 

In any event, I am glad you realized what a "fun" time those catchers are having back there.  And maybe now some coaches will measure blocking ability in addition to "pop times."   

I just looked at it.  That looks pretty good.  I had looked at your earlier sheets, but not the most recent one.  I'd say the catchers are looking pretty effective, even at the HS level.  MLB is more than likely even better.  There will always be those WPs that there is no way they could have been blocked, they are out of the catcher's control. 

I’ve been able to reconstruct the last 2 HSV seasons for our team. The 1^st page is how the catchers fared with the individual pitchers. The 2^nd is how the teams did, and the last shows how each game went for our pitchers.

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

Just out of curiosity, I thought I’d look at how the summer team made up of returning Sophs and incoming Fr.. I think its safe to say there’s a noticeable difference between the two groups.

http://www.infosports.com/scor...mages/cat2SUMMER.pdf

Now that I’ve at least partially compared a higher level to a lower one, I’m not really sure how things would look for MLB. I’ll see if I can dig out any data from the ML games I’ve scored.