tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5730822.post3800505019897091112..comments2024-03-28T07:19:18.670-07:00Comments on the joy of sox: Rays Announcers (and Players) Whine About Davidson's Calls; Were Their Complaints Legitimate?allanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04673233312198832937noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5730822.post-73262528528526593422010-06-01T19:27:31.039-07:002010-06-01T19:27:31.039-07:00Thank god I am not the only person who thinks this...Thank god I am not the only person who thinks this. I am a Yankee fan and was subjected to these two morons bitching and whining.... truly as ignorant as their fansAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5730822.post-61412818290417030132010-05-26T09:59:36.325-07:002010-05-26T09:59:36.325-07:00To elaborate, the home plate is 17 inches wide, so...To elaborate, the home plate is 17 inches wide, so 8.5 inches to either side (about 0.7 feet). Brooks draws the zone 1.0 feet to either side on those individual at-bat charts. You can see it's <a href="http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/cache/zoneplot.php-pitchSel=all&game=gid_2010_05_25_bosmlb_tbamlb_1&sp_type=1&s_type=7.gif" rel="nofollow">much smaller</a> on the normalized game plots. But even there, I think he's drawing it at around 0.8 feet.<br /><br />So it looks like pitch #2 against Aybar was still a strike, but #4 should have been a ball.Benjaminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00421785398444449007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5730822.post-65749529354991316872010-05-26T08:44:58.489-07:002010-05-26T08:44:58.489-07:00Benjamin: Thanks for that.
SoSock: I have seen pi...Benjamin: Thanks for that.<br /><br />SoSock: I have seen pitches right down the middle of the plate at a batter's belt and the Amica zone has it on the top line of the strike or even a little bit too high. At the belt!allanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04673233312198832937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5730822.post-47503426304935402122010-05-26T08:22:23.687-07:002010-05-26T08:22:23.687-07:00God, where to start with this? Firstly, thanks for...God, where to start with this? Firstly, thanks for the reminder that your graphs are from the ump's perspective. Those insurance zones have done their job--have me brainwashed so that every time I see one of these I think "center field cam". Anyway, I didn't think it was possible to find someone more obnoxious than Staats, but, lo, enter Kevin Kennedy. I also thought that constantly playing the victim card was written in their contracts, since the CW is that despite the Rays absolutely shitty home attendance their TV ratings are supposed to be good. What with all the geezers in FLA, what better way to get them riled up? But then I thought--wait, I'm a geezer and these two are so transparently full of shit, surely no one takes them seriously. I'm sure that if MLB ever did an honest survey, they'd find that the vast majority of their local telecasts are watched by regular baseball fans. IE, people that have more than just a passing interest and know when they're getting played. As for the plate umps and their personal strike zones, I keep thinking of laser technology, where the zone could be "painted" by lasers and 'beeped' when the pitch breaks it. You know, like the security systems in all those "caper" flicks. The plate ump would hold the beeper and still make the call. Just a rambling, early morning thought.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10275164807141705059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5730822.post-71662699769739395982010-05-26T08:07:20.849-07:002010-05-26T08:07:20.849-07:00Just so you know, Allan, Dan Brooks draws a bigger...Just so you know, Allan, Dan Brooks <a href="http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?showtopic=56540&st=20&p=2965486&#entry2965486" rel="nofollow">draws a bigger strikezone</a> on those uncorrected plots:<br /><br /><i>I draw the strikezones slightly differently on the strikezone plots for the entire game and the individual AB ones. The reason is because people often use the individual AB ones to draw conclusions about entire games, and that annoys me, and so it seems prudent to give the umpire the benefit of the doubt there. I figured it would lead to fewer angry emails.<br /><br />But, the textbook strikezone is drawn on the complete game plot. Maybe I should change it so that they're both equivalent. I don't know. </i><br /><br />If it's outside the drawn strikezone, it's really outside. If it's inside, it may really be borderline outside.Benjaminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00421785398444449007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5730822.post-5168693549751127892010-05-26T05:35:42.186-07:002010-05-26T05:35:42.186-07:00I for one hope they never switch to a computerized...I for one hope they never switch to a computerized calling system, and this will always be part of the game as long as they don't. So his strike zone was imperfect, they all are. There didn't seem to be any bias. If you ask me the Sox pitchers just did a better job of hitting corners and edges and got some of those calls. Exactly what I teach my Little Leaguers to do. If they see the ump is calling low, or outside a bit, go with it. Use it.<br />Bring the brooms tonight for JL-2!SoSockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15982944966573089279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5730822.post-11032629159658052692010-05-26T04:34:46.952-07:002010-05-26T04:34:46.952-07:00Calling balls and strikes has its challenges -- I ...Calling balls and strikes has its challenges -- I should know from doing it for a few years. Granted it was Little League but those coaches and parents can be just as fiery if they aren't happy with the calls. :-)<br /><br />The only thing I look for is that the home plate umpire keeps the strike zone consistent. From what I saw, Davidson did so last night. The F/X data only confirms what I believed.<br /><br />As usual, nice work, redsock!FenFanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02348863925130603048noreply@blogger.com