Catcher "framing" a pitch
 

Keep hearing this lately....especially Rod Allen doing the Tiger games.

Does that really exist? Or is that just coach/announcer speak?

I would think the Umpire behind the plate can see the ball cross the plate without any of the catchers help, but then again, I've never been behind the plate.

A good catcher "frames" a pitch by catching it properly and holding it giving the umpire a good view.

Do not confuse framing a pitch with dragging it into the zone, which any competent umpire will call a ball. After all, there is only one reason a catcher will drag a pitch, which is because he believes it was outside the zone.

So basically a good catcher "just catches the ball" ?

Like I said, never been behind the plate. Is it hard to see the ball cross the plate? Or just certain pitches?

And do Umpires get involved in the pitchers thinking? As in looking for a fastball or looking for a slider and get fooled?

No, it's more nuanced than that. A good catcher catches the ball in a manner that gives the umpire a clear look at the pitch and removes doubt from his mind that it was a strike. A catcher that sets up, sticks the pitch and isn't moving his glove all over the place or dropping the ball is doing a proper job of framing.

For example, on a low pitch at the knees, I'm more likely to ball a pitch if the catcher is turning his glove over and looks like he is digging it out. A catcher that keeps his thumb down with little or no glove movement is more likely to get a strike on that same pitch.

This of course varies by level and talent of the catchers. Sometimes you need to get strikes anyway you can.

Yes. No, but outside is not as easy as other pitches, so if the catcher catches a borderline properly he can help the decision.

Pitchers thinking is more a function of the pitcher, the catcher, and the level of play. Remember Bull Durham? But yes, if a pitcher has an 0-2 count on fastballs, and has a good slider, the umpire would not expect a fastball over the middle, but will call whatever comes. If the pitcher throws a slider on the outside corner and catcher sticks it, sit down.

Good umpires also get involved in game situation thinking, when is a hit and run most likely, sacrifice bunt, steal, pick-off, etc. It helps to know enough to anticipate what might happen and be ready for it but call whatever does happen.

I've found that a lot of catchers just aren't taught right these days and try to drag every pitch to the center of the plate. I don't throw away strikes.

A good catcher won't take a strike and try to make it a better strike.

The situation arises on marginal pitches. I want the catcher to stick a pitch which is on the outside edge of the plate so I can determine if it caught the zone. If he drags the pitch, he has taken that view away from me and everyone in the park saw him do that. The benefit of the doubt now goes to the batter.

I don't like to throw away strikes either but the catcher needs to help me out here, especially at HS varsity and above..

I've always taught my catchers their #1 job (besides not letting any balls get through to hit the plate ump - ahem!) was receiving the ball and keeping strikes strikes (i.e., not letting their glove travel out of the zone after receiving the ball).

There are techniques of teaching receiving that don't lend themselves to written description, but the main point is giving the umpire the best possible view of the where the ball is (and isn't) when it settles in the glove (with the full knowledge this is past the strike zone).

You'd be amazed at how many people are concerned about "pop" times and fielding and don't pay attention to the supposedly simple, but actually quite difficult, skill of receiving pitches.

I don't throw away strikes at the HS or small college levels. I don't expect good catching anymore.

For me, it's more about the catcher giving me a pitch that I can call a strike. If he's moving his glove all over, chances are he's not getting a strike. If he can stick a pitch, even if it's a little out of the zone, he's giving me a pitch I can call a strike.....it doesn't guarantee a strike, but it gives him a much better chance. Other things come into the consideration as well......consistency of a pitcher, is he hitting his spots, etc. It's not just about the strike zone......if the catcher sets up inside, but has to reach outside for a pitch, it's a ball, even if it catches the outside corner. That's not a pitch that I can sell as a strike.

wow!

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

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

Old school

New school

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.

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.

Double wow - a pitch in the strike zone is a strike regardless of where the catcher sets up.

Also hitting the spot a foot off the plate is still a ball.

Your "wow" ing is not constructive.

What levels of baseball do you umpire.?

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.

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

Where?

Alabama.

1982.

Even before I was an umpire, I think about the situation of any baseball game I watch. I'm strategizing between every pitch. I think it's why some of us can watch baseball and others think it's boring.

It's like how football drives me crazy because instead of allowing me to see the personnel groupings coming on and off the field, the broadcast shoves replays down my throat that I don't really care about. I saw the play the first time! If I want to see it again, I'll rewind it!

I've never umpired for someone throwing over 90 mph, but in general if pitchers are throwing sub-85 mph, there really is no fooling the umpire. There is enough time to adjust.

I wish some catchers had better reflexes though. I'd rather have the catcher thinking fastball and get a curve instead of the other way around. Why do those always seem to go straight at my mask?

Also, on another point, the strike zone doesn't move, so it doesn't matter where the catcher sets up. If it's over the plate, it's over the plate. Grab all the strikes you can. Managers can't argue balls and strikes anyway. I was watching yesterday's Red Sox v Mets game and that plate umpire was calling a ton of strikes as balls simply on how the catchers were setting up. He should lose his job! It was the worst plate call I've seen in a while and I've watched CB Bucknor call a game.

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.....

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?

Hrmph!
 

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

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.

:confused: Grab every strike you can. Every strike is another pitch closer to the finish.

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.

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.

Lol
 

What an arrogant prick.


Tee

Try educating yourself before deflecting on others. In depth studies have been done on stealing strikes. I didn't coin the phrase.

Now that may have been a little arrogant.

I sure that I am influenced by the catcher when I am calling balls & strikes. I know I shouldn't be, but I'm human and expect that more than just what I am concentrating on, the position of the ball as it passes over the plate, influences my call.

Lol
 

As you all know there is a website dedicated to evaluating MLB catchers and the quality of their framing.

Again, it is simply statistics and numbers don't lie.

Tee