13 strikes called balls for the Halos today

[eaterfan]

10 minutes ago, floplag said:

I make no such assumption at all, i assume them to be the best to even be there, but just cause they get there isnt a lifetime thing if they show themselves to consistently below average.  Review isnt accountability, action on the review is.  We all know there are guys in this league that are long past being worth being there, and yet there they are.
Is it hard, sure it is, i can forgive some borderline calls as long as its consistent.  Like i said before as players we all know diff umps have diff zones to a certain degree, its part of the game, im fine with that.  But when you see something like this game, and its disparity, that isnt typical. I never cared what the zoe was in reference to the definition, as long as it was called fairly and consistently.   13-2, by definition, is not that.

13-2 can happen even in a fair game. Assume there are 15 badly called pitches a game (5% of 300 pitches). I think that's a little low, but we're only dealing with strikes called. There are 2,430 MLB games a year. flip a coin in sets of 15. Do 2,430 sets. Sometimes (rarely) you will get 13-2. It doesn't mean the coin favored heads that one set or was worse at its job that day.

That being said, umpires can be worse or can be biased, and that's just another reason to make robot umps.

[floplag]

4 minutes ago, eaterfan said:

13-2 can happen even in a fair game. Assume there are 15 badly called pitches a game (5% of 300 pitches). I think that's a little low, but we're only dealing with strikes called. There are 2,430 MLB games a year. flip a coin in sets of 15. Do 2,430 sets. Sometimes (rarely) you will get 13-2. It doesn't mean the coin favored heads that one set or was worse at its job that day.

That being said, umpires can be worse or can be biased, and that's just another reason to make robot umps.

i cant support the robots, but i also cant support the incompetence.  I want the umps to do it right, maybe thats too much to ask.  Careers guyswith bad reps, when was the last one you saw actually help accountable, fired, sent down or anything else?  They better start, or the robots are coming. 

[eaterfan]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

i cant support the robots, but i also cant support the incompetence.  I want the umps to do it right, maybe thats too much to ask.  Careers guyswith bad reps, when was the last one you saw actually help accountable, fired, sent down or anything else?  They better start, or the robots are coming. 

My point is that it's only worthwhile to fire or suspend or send down a guy if there is someone who is better to replace him. I'm not sure there are more than a handful of guys who can do it better than what we currently have. It's not enough to make a meaningful difference in the percentage of pitches that are called incorrectly. I think the number of bad calls is probably somewhere between the 5% MLB uses and the was it 20% sited earlier in a study? Let's say the very best an ump can do is 5% missed calls even if you replaced the bottom third of umps with guys who only miss 5% of the calls it doesn't move the needle much.

[floplag]

1 minute ago, eaterfan said:

My point is that it's only worthwhile to fire or suspend or send down a guy if there is someone who is better to replace him. I'm not sure there are more than a handful of guys who can do it better than what we currently have. It's not enough to make a meaningful difference in the percentage of pitches that are called incorrectly. I think the number of bad calls is probably somewhere between the 5% MLB uses and the was it 20% sited earlier in a study? Let's say the very best an ump can do is 5% missed calls even if you replaced the bottom third of umps with guys who only miss 5% of the calls it doesn't move the needle much.

You cannot tell me that there isnt a single umpire in AAA that deserves a shot, really? 

[eaterfan]

5 minutes ago, floplag said:

You cannot tell me that there isnt a single umpire in AAA that deserves a shot, really? 

No. I didn't say that. I think there are probably about a dozen umpires in the minors who could probably do a better job than some MLB guys. But it's still a pretty small percentage and it won't really change the overall numbers. 

[floplag]

1 minute ago, eaterfan said:

No. I didn't say that. I think there are probably about a dozen umpires in the minors who could probably do a better job than some MLB guys. But it's still a pretty small percentage and it won't really change the overall numbers. 

You cant say that with certainty, replacing umps that are consistently poor with those who are not could do exactly that

[jordan]

17 minutes ago, eaterfan said:

No. I didn't say that. I think there are probably about a dozen umpires in the minors who could probably do a better job than some MLB guys. But it's still a pretty small percentage and it won't really change the overall numbers. 

I think replacing the likes of Joe West, Angel Hernandez, and CB Buckenor could make a huge difference.  That's how terrible they are. 

[eaterfan]

40 minutes ago, floplag said:

You cant say that with certainty, replacing umps that are consistently poor with those who are not could do exactly that

It's pretty easy to tell with a great degree of certainty. Just look at the percentage of pitch calls missed among the guys you are replacing and and the pitch calls missed among the guys you are replacing them will. Multiply the difference by the average number of pitches in a game and you get the difference. Now remember that these guys are only behind home plate 1/4 of the time so it only effects those game. So we're looking at 1/5 of the umpires (assuming there are 60 umpires) 1/4 of the time. This means you're looking at something like a 5% difference in accuracy in 5% of the games. .05 x .05 is .0025. That's not a difference. 

In addition to that you are jeopardizing the relationship between MLB and the umpires, for such a small gain, if they have no sense of security and MLB won't attract as good of an umpire talent pool. The flip side is that maybe they aren't such cocky arrogant asses if they have a fear of losing their jobs. But on the flip side of that, so much animosity between teams and umpires is arguing balls and strikes. If you take that element out of the game maybe the relationship between the umpires and the players/managers improves and the umpires aren't ego maniacal jerks. Let's take yesterday's game. Trout's slide at second in the past would have lead to a heated argument, and possibly a managerial or player ejection. Instead, the correct call was made and we got an incredulous shrug from Profar. That's it. Now imagine we took all the animosity out of balls and strikes called.

[floplag]

12 minutes ago, eaterfan said:

It's pretty easy to tell with a great degree of certainty. Just look at the percentage of pitch calls missed among the guys you are replacing and and the pitch calls missed among the guys you are replacing them will. Multiply the difference by the average number of pitches in a game and you get the difference. Now remember that these guys are only behind home plate 1/4 of the time so it only effects those game. So we're looking at 1/5 of the umpires (assuming there are 60 umpires) 1/4 of the time. This means you're looking at something like a 5% difference in accuracy in 5% of the games. .05 x .05 is .0025. That's not a difference. 

In addition to that you are jeopardizing the relationship between MLB and the umpires if they have no sense of security and MLB won't attract as good of an umpire talent pool. The flip side is that maybe they aren't such cocky arrogant asses if they have a fear of losing their jobs. But on the flip side of that, so much animosity between teams and umpires is arguing balls and strikes. If you take that element out of the game maybe the relationship between the umpires and the players/managers improves and the umpires aren't ego maniacal jerks.

Honestly, i pretty much disagree with almost all of this, but its not worth arguing.  I simply feels umps need to be help to a standard of excellence, and that their be consequences for excessive failures to do so, pretty much like everyone else.   

[Fish Oil]

I have a question for those who enjoy the human element; Do you realize that resentment, jealousy, and favoritism are part of being human?

20 years ago I had a friend who was a major league ump. If anyone thinks that their mistakes are always accidental then you don't clearly understand what the human element entails.

[eaterfan]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

Honestly, i pretty much disagree with almost all of this, but its not worth arguing.  I simply feels umps need to be help to a standard of excellence, and that their be consequences for excessive failures to do so, pretty much like everyone else.   

I'm just saying human umpires are incapable of reaching a standard of excellence in this field. 

[floplag]

Just now, eaterfan said:

I'm just saying human umpires are incapable of reaching a standard of excellence in this field. 

i disagree, excellence doesn't mean perfection. 

[eaterfan]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

i disagree, excellence doesn't mean perfection. 

That's fine, but then we are talking about degrees. And the degree to which the bad umpires miss calls and the good ones are minuscule and it won't effect anything in a real way. 

BTW, robot umps won't be perfect. I'd imagine they will probably have between a 98% accuracy at first. But it's still a much bigger (and less biased) improvement than what you would get by replacing what umpires we currently have with the 60 best umpires on earth.

[OCAngelsNotLAA]

They should be grading all umpires on their accuracy of the strike zone in all levels of baseball.  Demote the bottom 20% each season to the minors and promote the top 20% of minor league umpires to replace them.  This way we force the umpires to be as accurate as possible if they want to make MLB money as well as give the better minor league umps a way for them to get into the show.  

[JarsOfClay]

19 hours ago, Dochalo said:

Glad we won, but that's just unacceptable.  

6 of those weren't even on the corner.  

The Rangers had 2.  

It almost cost the game.  

I have yet to see a site that tracks umpire accuracy.  That's a little suspicious to be honest.  We have catcher framing stats.  

How about a little transparency.

If the Rangers are getting the strikes and the Angels aren't, then what makes you think it's the umpire and not Maldonado?  I remember a game in Seattle last year that Nolasco was pitching and he threw something like 14 straight strikes that were all called balls. (and yes Im aware the stats says he was a good framer last year) My eyes and Gameday also thinks he's terrible at pitch framing (and pitch calling).

 

[Lou]

if the umpire is competent, a catcher's framing ability should have nothing to do with a pitch is called a ball or a strike. 

this is on the umps, not the catchers

[Farmbuildingfan]

Bad calls in baseball can have greater repercussions than in in any other sport because one bad call can effect the next game as well.

How many extra pitches did Anderson need to throw because of the umpire's egregious mistake?, 12?, 15?

It's possible those extra pitches could make a pitcher unavailable the next next game, and possibly affecting its outcome as well.

Umpires can be forgiven for not being perfect when  the ball is a couple inches from the edge or corner either way, but the one that was called a ball on Anderson was not even near the edge of the zone.  

 

 

[Pujols4MVP]

6 hours ago, artesmustache said:

the technology is there - use it.

its just MLB being MLB, always a step behind. No progressive thinkers. For Christs sake, they still play by different rules within the league...these old crusty fuhks and players association do more harm than good to the game.

As more of generation Z enters MLB there will be increased support for a computerized srikezone, i'm talking like the AI machine in CBS's 'Person of interest' level of accuracy calling the strikes & determining foul balls etc.

[Stradling]

9 hours ago, JarsOfClay said:

If the Rangers are getting the strikes and the Angels aren't, then what makes you think it's the umpire and not Maldonado?  I remember a game in Seattle last year that Nolasco was pitching and he threw something like 14 straight strikes that were all called balls. (and yes Im aware the stats says he was a good framer last year) My eyes and Gameday also thinks he's terrible at pitch framing (and pitch calling).

 

I guess for starters Maldonado wasn’t playing yesterday.

Edited June 5, 2018 by The Boogie Man

[JarsOfClay]

3 hours ago, The Boogie Man said:

I guess for starters Maldonado wasn’t playing yesterday.

I'm not just talking yesterday. Angels pitchers have had problems throwing strikes all season long. Maybe Briceno is just as bad, but either way there is an underlying issue.

Sorry but I dont think every umpire in MLB has a personal agenda against angel pitchers.

[Angel Oracle]

19 hours ago, jordan said:

I think replacing the likes of Joe West, Angel Hernandez, and CB Buckenor could make a huge difference.  That's how terrible they are. 

Unfortunately, Country Bumpkin West has too much power.

[jordan]

2 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

Unfortunately, Country Bumpkin West has too much power.

Yes he does.  He's probably one of those types who will die on the field.  Meaning he will die doing what he loves even though he sucks at it. 

[Pujols4MVP]

7 hours ago, jordan said:

Yes he does.  He's probably one of those types who will die on the field.  Meaning he will die doing what he loves even though he sucks at it. 

Soon West will get cataracts & he'll just be making random calls on balls & strikes.