Computerized Strike Zone

good idea mr umpire....

Now that being said.....no player, pitcher, manager, pitching coach, batting coach or hitter wants a machine calling balls and strikes....

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Umpire:
…If computers are going to be used for the strike zone, will they go by the rulebook defined zone then? If computers are going to do it, then do it by the book. I guarantee no hitter will like it. Especially the high and tight one going just under the elbows. Tough to hit that pitch but a computer will call it a strike as an umpire probably won't. More fans will hate that call the most in all of baseball b/c it is an unhittable pitch.

What else would they go by other than the zone defined in the book. The only reason for even considering non-human calling of pitches is because humans aren’t using the zone defined in the book.

I think your guarantee is exaggerating some, but I don’t doubt there will be more that don’t like it than do, at least at the outset, but that’s the way it is for almost any change in anything, not just baseball. I also think one of the main reasons for not liking it will be that one of the best excuses in the world will be gone with no inconsistent umpire to blame.

No more pitchers griping about how they were pounding the zone but not getting calls. No more batters being able to complain about the umpire giving certain pitcher more of a zone than others. But I really believe that in time, both pitchers and hitters will come to really appreciate not having to contend with the one thing that’s the biggest complaint at any level in the game, inconsistency. How many times have we all heard or said that as long as the umpire was consistent, it didn’t matter how accurate he was because players could adjust.

But why should players need to adjust? If it was the intention of the rules that the players should have to adjust to a moving strike zone, they wouldn’t have defined it the way they did. I know as a hitter I’d love to be able to know for absolutely certain that if I learned how to judge pitches relative to the strike zone better than everyone else, I’d be rewarded for my skill. And the same goes for a pitcher. Of course it will very likely mean velocity without control will lose a lot of its “luster” as hitters learn the zone better and better, but it will also mean a much higher premium on command and movement.

quote:

The fans and players will hate it when computers are used. The low and outside pitch will be another hated call. Can't do much with that pitch but they will have to hit it nonetheless.

The fans hate what they’re told to, but why would a fan hate pitches being called accurately? Its hard to believe hitters could strike out much more than they do right now, so what’s the big deal?

quote:

Pitchers will hate it as well. They can no longer go an inch or 2 off the plate and get the call. Now, it has to be on the white part and hope they don't get hit too hard. There will be a lot of pitchers without a job without those calls.

Trust me. For every pitcher that loses his job because he hasn’t got the accuracy, command, and “stuff” to throw the ball in the zone and not get the snot knocked out if it, there will always be 5 ready to take his place.

quote:

Computers cannot handle the finer points of the game. Hence the human element of the game.

What fine point of the game is there about calling a pitch relative to a defined point in space? But the best thing about it is, if it doesn’t work out the way the owners think it will, all they have to do is change the rulebook back. That’s the great thing about erasers and word processors. And its not as though all the ML umpires will have forgotten how to call pitches, and even if they did, its not as though they couldn’t relearn how to do it.

First, you are not facing 90+ mph pitches. Get a few of those under your elbows and you will not get the first hit. Not even close. Even MLB hitters let them go b/c they know the umpire won't call it. If a computer calls it, more will complain and fewer will be able to hit it. Most get upset now when the umpire calls it in the middle of the plate at the top of the zone.

Second, some of the best pitchers in baseball would never have been there with computers calling the straight zone. There may be 5 waiting to get there but there will be a lot shorter careers. Less time for fans to know players and follow them. There is already this complaint due to free agency. Now, you want to throw in shorter careers on top of that.

Players adjusting to the umpire is as much part of it as adjusting to the pitcher and defense. They have to adjust to the pitch as it comes in. Making the game easier for the hitter does NOT make the game better. The more challenging, the better feeling of reward when something is accomplished. Many competitors and athletes will tell you that.

Also, fans are a little smarter than you seem to give them credit. They may not know the rules of the game but many can stand on their own 2 feet about things. Spoken like a true out of touch computer.

As a computer, you are missing the finer points of the game already in your argument for computers and IR. Very similar to what a computer will do and thus miss the point of having human umpires over computer ones.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Umpire:
First, you are not facing 90+ mph pitches. Get a few of those under your elbows and you will not get the first hit. Not even close. Even MLB hitters let them go b/c they know the umpire won't call it. If a computer calls it, more will complain and fewer will be able to hit it. Most get upset now when the umpire calls it in the middle of the plate at the top of the zone.

I’m not understanding the purpose of that. Are you saying the umpire calls pitches based on what the hitters complain or don’t complain about?

quote:

Second, some of the best pitchers in baseball would never have been there with computers calling the straight zone. There may be 5 waiting to get there but there will be a lot shorter careers. Less time for fans to know players and follow them. There is already this complaint due to free agency. Now, you want to throw in shorter careers on top of that.

How would using technology to call pitches control whether or not anyone made it to the pros? I can’t see any way levels below affiliated pro ball will be able to afford the technology, so it will be the very same people making it into the pro system.

Why do you feel careers will be shortened?

quote:

Players adjusting to the umpire is as much part of it as adjusting to the pitcher and defense. They have to adjust to the pitch as it comes in. Making the game easier for the hitter does NOT make the game better. The more challenging, the better feeling of reward when something is accomplished. Many competitors and athletes will tell you that.

Making the game easier for the hitter doesn’t mean its harder for the pitcher, giving the hitter some kind of huge advantage. And if you don’t find it challenging to try to throw a baseball so a hitter won’t hit it well, or to hit that 90+ under the elbows on the inside corner, I don’t know how anything else would challenge you.

quote:

Also, fans are a little smarter than you seem to give them credit. They may not know the rules of the game but many can stand on their own 2 feet about things. Spoken like a true out of touch computer.

What is it I don’t give fans credit for?

quote:

As a computer, you are missing the finer points of the game already in your argument for computers and IR. Very similar to what a computer will do and thus miss the point of having human umpires over computer ones.

I don’t know how or why you’ve decided to make things personal by name-calling, even though that name isn’t personally derogatory to me.

I understand the “finer” points of the game as much or more than you. But, I don’t equate doing something wrong with being a positive thing, just to keep things from changing.

I’ll say once again. The game is controlled by 30 votes. If 16 of those votes say they’re gonna try using technology to call the pitch relative to the strike zone, that’s what’s gonna happen. If ML umpires don’t like it, they can protest to the point of going on strike if they like, but I doubt they’ll get their way. The only thing that will sway those votes, is the fans staying away to the point where the bottom line is hurt. Now if you really believe that the fans will do that in protest to pitches being called accurately, then we have an honest difference of opinion.

I really don’t think the fans care all that much about whether there’s an umpire doing it or a machine. Its not as though the PU would disappear, but rather that he’d cede one portion of his duties to something better qualified to carry out the rules completely fairly and without prejudice.

First, there was no name calling whatsoever.

When certain things become customary or accepted, things are called based on that. It is accepted not to call the one up and in. Both, pitchers and hitters, accept that and they generally accept a little off the outside part to make up for it. Give a little, take a little. Computers have no concept of this. Again, I think you are missing the finer points still.

Careers will be shorter due to the "finesse" pitchers won't be given what they have been working with. Now, those just off the plate strikes are no longer and there will be less chasing those pitches. Again, a lot of these type pitchers would not make it very long.

For MLB hitters, it is a huge advantage. The under the elbows pitch will be challenging. But, when the pitcher loses that inch or 2 off the white, not much of a challenge anymore when the pitch isn't under the elbows. Not for a MLB hitter. The challenge becomes less since many can't put it under the elbows consistently especially since it is unnatural feeling to put the ball that high intentionally. A good pitcher wants to drive the ball down and change level of perception.

I understand fans will still go to the games and pay money. That will not change. Fans want to see the game regardless of who calls it. But, this is not a fan's forum. It is an umpire's forum and many, if not most, will not like the idea. It isn't about money in these discussions of opposition. That is for MLB to deal with.

Now, you are talking about who makes the decision and who pays for it. We don't care about that part here. Going that route has absolutely NO value to the discussion of pros/cons.

Not once have I heard a pro to it other than "the strike zone will be called by the rulebook". That is the only pro anybody has presented. While there have been a lot more cons to it which a computer cannot comprehend and some people don't.

There is a lot more than just calling a defined rulebook strike zone. So much more than any technology will never be able to replicate. So much more in the game that will be taken away from it if technology is used. Some of the "show" will be removed. This is something so many overlook and have no idea what will be lost if computers are used.

Things such as timing, interactions, and much more not even part of the actual game. Computers are cold and calculated. The game of baseball is not.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Umpire:
First, there was no name calling whatsoever.

Evidently I’ve misunderstood what’s below. I sure thought you were calling me a computer as some kind of a putdown.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Umpire:…
As a computer, you are missing the finer points of the game already in your argument for computers and IR. Very similar to what a computer will do and thus miss the point of having human umpires over computer ones.

quote:

When certain things become customary or accepted, things are called based on that. It is accepted not to call the one up and in. Both, pitchers and hitters, accept that and they generally accept a little off the outside part to make up for it. Give a little, take a little. Computers have no concept of this. Again, I think you are missing the finer points still.

Not missing anything. To me, its just a nicer way of saying cheating is ok because its accepted. Me, if the defined zone is so lousy, I’d think they’d just move the inside of the batter’s boxes 6 more inches away from the plate, then go ahead and call the zone as defined.

quote:

Careers will be shorter due to the "finesse" pitchers won't be given what they have been working with. Now, those just off the plate strikes are no longer and there will be less chasing those pitches. Again, a lot of these type pitchers would not make it very long.

Well, I don’t agree that a finesse pitcher’s career would necessarily be shorter, but I do believe there would be a ton of power pitchers either backing off to get some control, or hitting the bricks. Its all in what the owers determine they want to see in the game.

quote:

For MLB hitters, it is a huge advantage. The under the elbows pitch will be challenging. But, when the pitcher loses that inch or 2 off the white, not much of a challenge anymore when the pitch isn't under the elbows. Not for a MLB hitter. The challenge becomes less since many can't put it under the elbows consistently especially since it is unnatural feeling to put the ball that high intentionally. A good pitcher wants to drive the ball down and change level of perception.

This isn’t to question what you’re saying, but rather to find out if you’re talking from personal experience or from what you “believe” is true. Are you or have you been connected with MLB in any capacity? Like I said, it makes no difference to me, other than to determine how much weight to give what you’re saying. In research I’ve done, I’ve talked to a current and a retired ML umpire about this, many Ex and active ML pitchers, a couple of EX ML pitching coaches, and more active and ex ML players than I can remember, and once you get past all the rhetoric and chest puffing, none has ever said anything like you’ve just said. Many of them don’t like the idea of IR or technology calling pitches, but only from a traditional sense, not one of accuracy or how it would affect the ability of the players to cope.

quote:

I understand fans will still go to the games and pay money. That will not change. Fans want to see the game regardless of who calls it. But, this is not a fan's forum. It is an umpire's forum and many, if not most, will not like the idea. It isn't about money in these discussions of opposition. That is for MLB to deal with.

OK, now its clear. Because I’m not an umpire, what I have to say carries no weight and isn’t appreciated because this is an umpire’s forum. Not a problem.

quote:

Now, you are talking about who makes the decision and who pays for it. We don't care about that part here. Going that route has absolutely NO value to the discussion of pros/cons.

I get it. You don’t want to be challenged in any, shape or form because you’ve made up your mind and nothing will ever change it. Fine. I get it. No harm, no foul, and I’ll just refrain from any further participation.

The players have a big say in what happens to the rules. No rule can pass unless they say so, right or wrong, that is the way it is. There is more to answer but I have a meeting.

At this point, whatever. You haven't pointed out anything to support how a computer zone helps the game. Only, how computerized the zone will be.

And, you have made up your mind that you want it. What's the difference? Nothing I have said seems to change your mind. You want computers, many don't. You don't like being challenged in the realm in which this discussion is being held: From an umpire's perspective, not some random fan's.

We look at what it takes away from the game which is a lot more than what it adds to the game. You look at one part of what it does for the game and even that is not welcomed by many, if not most, of those involved with the game.

Also, no one is cheating. The use of that word in this is absurd. Using what is accepted to call the game and define one's judgment is not cheating anything. In fact, it is curbing things in favor of the players since they don't live in a black and white world as computers do.