Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NCAA Tournament Bubble Watch

Working Off The Plate To Get A Called Strike

I'm very excited to be joining Beyond the Box Score. A lot of fantastic baseball writers have called BtB home, so it's very cool to be in that group (the latter, if not necessarily the former). For those interested, you can find my Orioles coverage at Camden Crazies and follow me on Twitter at (surprise!) CamdenCrazies. Hope you enjoy my miscellaneous ramblings.

I was looking at some Pitch/FX data a couple weeks ago and - as will sometimes happen - Tom Glavine popped into my mind. Specifically, the way Glavine was said to have worked the outside corner, getting a called strike and then throwing a pitch a little farther outside, and then another a little farther, and so on. As the announcers would tell it, before long Glavine would be getting strikes called on pitches a foot outside. I asked around and it seemed that no one had looked into this previously (correct me if I'm wrong), and Eric Seidman from Baseball Prospectus was kind enough to help me lay out how to go about things. (I didn't do exactly what Eric suggested, but I wanted to thank him for the assistance.)

So here's how it worked; I took all of the pitches thrown in 2008 and 2009 off the outside edge of the strike-zone and looked at the called strike percentage for the ones taken in that area. Then I looked at the called strike percentage in that zone depending on where the previous pitch was thrown (with the same pitcher/batter), assuming that it too was taken (and whether it was called a ball or a strike).

Star-divide

The outside the zone area was from the top to the bottom of the strike-zone, and about from 1.25 to 5 inches outside. The area on the outside edge of the strike-zone* was from about 2.5 inches in the strike-zone to 1.25 inches outside. And then there were the pitches thrown everywhere else. I wanted to break things down more finely to really get to my original question, but there just wouldn't have been enough pitches in a given area to get a clear picture.

* It should be noted that the strike-zone already extends outside off the plate, so the "outside edge" zone is actually right off the plate but mostly in an area were pitches are called strikes more often than not. I suppose the zone could have been called "off the plate" and "well off the plate" instead.

This is a graphic of the zones I'm talking about (to a left-handed batter, in this case), with the orange area being the pitches farther outside the zone and the blue area the pitches on the outside edge of the zone.


Zoneoutside_medium

To the results... Here's a table of the various called strike percentages for pitches in the orange zone, for left-handed hitters and right-handed hitters: 

All pitches taken outside the zone Pitches taken outside the zone, when previous pitch was taken When previous pitch taken:
Outside the zone On the edge Elsewhere
LHH 32.3% 30.7% 31.6% 25.8% 31.1%
RHH 8.8% 8.1% 11.2% 7.0% 7.9%

You can see how much more often lefties get that outside pitch called against them than righties in general. When a batter took a previous pitch (Pitch 1, let's say) - regardless of the call or the location - the called strike percentage on the subsequent pitch off the plate (Pitch 2) was lower than overall rate. When Pitch 1 was thrown off the plate outside, Pitch 2 was called a strike more often - especially to right-handed batters (relatively speaking). On the other hand, when Pitch 1 was thrown on the outside part of the plate then Pitch 2 was actually called a strike less often. Perhaps seeing a pitch there allowed the umpire to more clearly focus on the dividing line between a ball and a strike.

Did it matter what Pitch 1 was called? 


Pitches taken outside the zone, when previous pitch taken:
Batter
Outside the zone On the edge Elsewhere

Strike Ball Strike Ball Strike Ball
LHH 34.2% 30.5% 25.1% 27.5% 19.8% 35.4%
RHH 19.4% 10.4% 6.7% 7.3% 4.4% 10.0%

 

As expected, if Pitch 1 well outside the strike-zone was called a strike then Pitch 2 was more likely to also be called a strike. (Consistency!) Against right-handed batters there was a particularly big jump, though those sample sizes were relatively small. For pitches on the edge though, getting a strike called actually made it less likely that Pitch 2 was called a strike, as well as being less likely than if Pitch 1 was called a ball. The differences aren't tremendous - and I don't want say that there was certainly a causal relationship - but perhaps the umpires would occasionally throw in a make-up call if they think they missed one. And when Pitch 1 was taken for a strike not on the outside part of the zone, then having Pitch 2 called a strike off the plate was far less likely.

I thought that maybe the general rate at which different umpires called strikes in the orange zone had an effect, but when splitting things out by those that had a higher than average called strike percentage in the outside zone and those that had a lower than average called strike percentage, the relative differences were similar to the overall numbers. I wanted to do it by individual umpires, but the sample sizes where way too small.

Wouldn't say this was conclusive, but I thought it was interesting. It does look like being able to hit your spot off the plate repeatedly might get a pitcher an extra call or two.

Comment 5 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Great read

perhaps luckily for Glavine, PitcF/X wasn’t around.

by mketchen on Mar 8, 2010 2:11 PM EST reply actions  

This is the exact kind of study that would

eventually lead to computerized strike calls.

And by that, I mean, “completely ignored great ideas.”

Check out Two Out Rally, the new BASEBALL MMORPG, coming soon!
twooutrally.com | Two Out Rally on facebook | Twitter: @2OutRally

by Justin Bopp on Mar 8, 2010 3:04 PM EST reply actions  

Here's hoping

Great article, Daniel.

I can’t help but wonder if a few umpires in particular are skewing the results…

www.bullpenbanter.com

by alskor on Mar 9, 2010 12:11 PM EST up reply actions  

This is exactly the type

of study I love to see, even if the results were less than conclusive. So much of the handed-down conventional baseball wisdom seems logical, but remains unverified. And it’s frustrating to simply have to assume the CW has merit. Props to you, sir.

by JDanger on Mar 8, 2010 3:48 PM EST reply actions  

If this conventional wisdom is true, well

those pitchers can extract some really strong run value. I think trying to find who’s getting this done on a year-to-year basis would afford us very small sample sizes though, so it may be difficult to tell.

by SFiercex4 on Mar 8, 2010 5:57 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

We use numbers and stuff.
Community Guidelines
Why be a member?

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Free Agent Compensation
Img_0001_small
Value of Various Plate Approaches
Strike_three2_small
Effect of Foul Area on Strikeouts: AL 1954-68: Erratum
Small
Baseball on a stick
Small
Player Evaluating Statistic
Baseball_small
Rays Outfield: Cheap but Extremely Productive
Small
A new xBABIP
Small
Jack Morris "pitching to the score"
Strike_three2_small
Foul Area and Differences in SO: AL vs NL
Baseball_small
Is there a Kuroda and Oswalt Alternative?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Follow us on Facebook!

Follow us on Twitter!

SaberGraphics

MLB Daily Dish

Get the latest MLB Trade Rumors, Transactions, and News at MLB Daily Dish!


Managing Editor:

Jbopp-kc_small Justin Bopp

Columnists:

Adam_small adarowski

Dme_small Satchel Price

Closeup4_small J-Doug

Carlosicon_small Julian Levine

Billy_and_daddy_4th_of_july_small Bill Petti

Featuring:

Dayton_small Jeff Zimmerman

12475953_small Jacob Peterson

Picture-6_small Chris St. John

Btbpro_small Dave Gershman

229331_10150183361996591_674441590_6760167_6637860_n3_small Lewie Pollis

Img_3830_small David Fung