Catcher "framing" a pitch

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by cbailey

wow all you want.....not getting my ass chewed for rewarding a pitcher/catcher who can't hit their spots.

Old school

Originally Posted by Rich

I wonder who's doing all the chewing. I don't throw away strikes and nobody's bitching. Hasn't hurt my assignments in the least bit.

New school

[Multiple Sports]

In this "new school" vs. "old school" debate, I'll take old school every time. Catcher sets up 1 inch off of outside blk and pitcher paints inside black....that's a ball all day long....I don't claim to be right but the higher level of ball I work the less problems I get.....

[drumsub]

To address the original question a bit more, which Rich hinted at it in one of his responses, the frame is your body. When you hear educated people talk about framing a pitch it has nothing to do with dragging the ball. It has more to do with catching it inside their frame (picture a box around their body). If they can ankle sway well, get around the ball, beat the ball to it's spot, and stick the catch, they can influence close calls. This is most effective at the younger ages, but I've caught with college level umps behind me and stolen more than a few strikes.

Of course when I was a kid it was a misunderstood art and everyone taught us to drag the ball a little. I still hear people coaching that, and when they try it on me in a game I tell the catcher I won't react well to him trying to make me look bad. If you drag it that means you think it was a ball, so why should I call it a strike?

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Rich

I wonder who's doing all the chewing. I don't throw away strikes and nobody's bitching. Hasn't hurt my assignments in the least bit.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I agree. No way I'm getting rid of a strike clearly in the zone. There always seems to be less complaining with more strikes being called.

[Rich]

The thing that all the computers in the Major Leagues has done has eliminated (for the most part) the notion that a pitch has to be caught a certain way.

Those guys call more strikes on pitches caught in an unconventional manner than they ever did 15 years ago.

I'll have catchers set up inside and pitchers throw the ball over the plate and catchers will reach outside their frames to catch the pitch that almost splits the plate in half -- if there are umpires still calling those pitches balls, you don't have to do that anymore.

Nobody will say a word if it's called a strike...and if they do, so what? They should put some bran in their diets.

[CT1]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'll have catchers set up inside and pitchers throw the ball over the plate and catchers will reach outside their frames to catch the pitch that almost splits the plate in half -- if there are umpires still calling those pitches balls, you don't have to do that anymore.

Nobody will say a word if it's called a strike...and if they do, so what? They should put some bran in their diets.

I get what you're saying -- I really do. I don't like having to call a ball on a pitch that gets the outside corner when the catcher is way inside. Unfortunately, in some parts of the country, good game management dictates otherwise.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by CT1

Unfortunately, in some parts of the country, good game management dictates otherwise.

Seriously? On what level(s)? I will never (never) pass up a strike. Even if the catcher doesn't catch it (that used to be a "must" - 30 years ago). Even if the catcher gets crossed up and butchers it. Even if he backhands one on the outside corner after he's set up inside. Etc, etc, etc. You just gotta get strikes.

JJ

[Matt]

Originally Posted by CT1

I get what you're saying -- I really do. I don't like having to call a ball on a pitch that gets the outside corner when the catcher is way inside. Unfortunately, in some parts of the country, good game management dictates otherwise.

Where?

[Tim C]

So now this has generated (or degenerated by some opinions) into people displaying lack of knowledge about what "framing" actually is . . . probably time to move on.

Tee

[CoachPaul]

The "frame" is the strike zone and not the catcher's body. I've never heard of anything so ridiculous as "the catcher is the frame." Framing is presenting the ball to the umpire in order to give him the best look at the ball and the best chance of getting every strike for your pitcher; not that it was caught between your shoulders. A ball thrown outside the zone where the catcher doesn't have to move his glove is not something to be rewarded with a strike call. It needs to be a strike to be called a strike, people! The pitcher was trying to get the batter to chase. The fact that the batter was disciplined enough to resist the bait should not end in an umpire ringing him up!

The biggest old school v new school issue that I see is how catchers frame the low strike. It used to be just as good to turn the glove fingers down and stick the catch, now there's some BS theory that just by turning the glove you are admitting it is too low. The ball's position establishes strike or ball, McFly. I can catch strikes with my fingers down all day and the umpires should not shun strikes. So many times I've seen a strike bounce off the catcher's thumb pad by him trying to meet the new school standard of catching the ball with the thumb down. The ball skitters away and runners advance. Trying to catch the ball more securely should not be penalized by calling a strike a ball just because the catcher secured the ball in the most efficient manner.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by CoachPaul

The "frame" is the strike zone and not the catcher's body. I've never heard of anything so ridiculous as "the catcher is the frame." Framing is presenting the ball to the umpire in order to give him the best look at the ball and the best chance of getting every strike for your pitcher; not that it was caught between your shoulders. A ball thrown outside the zone where the catcher doesn't have to move his glove is not something to be rewarded with a strike call. It needs to be a strike to be called a strike, people! The pitcher was trying to get the batter to chase. The fact that the batter was disciplined enough to resist the bait should not end in an umpire ringing him up!

The biggest old school v new school issue that I see is how catchers frame the low strike. It used to be just as good to turn the glove fingers down and stick the catch, now there's some BS theory that just by turning the glove you are admitting it is too low. The ball's position establishes strike or ball, McFly. I can catch strikes with my fingers down all day and the umpires should not shun strikes. So many times I've seen a strike bounce off the catcher's thumb pad by him trying to meet the new school standard of catching the ball with the thumb down. The ball skitters away and runners advance. Trying to catch the ball more securely should not be penalized by calling a strike a ball just because the catcher secured the ball in the most efficient manner.

You claiming it is reality does not make it so. If the catcher turns his glove and is able to catch it cleanly, it is too low. If it was a strike, it wouldn't be able to be cleanly caught that way (in general.)

That aside, the biggest hindrance to catchers getting the low strike isn't the position of the glove. It's that they sweep up with the arm as they catch it, basically pulling the glove.

[drumsub]

At no point did I say catching it within the catcher's frame makes it a strike. I'm just responding to the original question about framing and what (most) announcers are referring to. Yes, there is still the old school mentality of moving the glove towards the center a small amount, but it's falling off more every year.

That said, if you think catchers can't steal strikes you're fooling yourself. In depth studies have been done that show me enough to continue to teach my catchers the art of the ankle sway and keeping the ball within the window of their body, while getting around those borderline corner pitches.

Framing wouldn't even be a concept if umps were perfect at seeing if it touched the strike zone. But good catchers steal strikes all the time, at every level of the game.

[Rich]

Your "wow" ing is not constructive.

What levels of baseball do you umpire.?

[Rich]

Steal strikes?

Here's a secret - I wish I had 2 good framers every game. If it's borderline, I want that catcher to help as much as possible.

On the other hand, a catcher that butchers a cockshot isn't gonna lose a strike.