So how bad were the umpires? Game 1
One of the major themes of the Red Sox series was unhappiness with the umpires, so I decided to do a little investigation via MLB's Game Day. Obviously it's not a science with them; they are only as good as whoever is entering the data. But it certainly interesting to take a look at.
I first took a look at game 1, which the Red Sox won 4-0. In the game the Red Sox sent 39 men to the plate in the game, and by my count they had 5 batters who received borderline calls and 10 batters who had pitches that were blatently called incorrectly. That's 38% of Red Sox batters who potentially had incorrect calls against them. You be the judge.
(note: if there is a strike out of the zone that I don't mention, the batter swung)
This is Mark Kotsay in the 2nd inning. After pitch two was called a strike he probably felt he had to swing at the third pitch.
Kotsay again in the 3rd inning. After getting a ball called on the second pitch, the third was called a strike despite being even further outside.
Check out ball one on Kevin Youkilis in the 3rd. Looks pretty good, especially compared to pitches four and five, both of which were called strikes.
Jason Varitek takes a pitch right down the middle of the plate for ball 1 in the 4th inning.
This one is my favorite. Dustin Pedroia walks on 4 pitches in the 6th inning.
The third pitch to David Ortiz in the 7th looks pretty good to me.
Maybe the third pitch to Jacoby Ellsbury in the 8th inning could be considered borderline, but all the same.
Also in the 8th inning, Jason Varitek takes a ridiculous called strike one.
Strike one to Nick Green in the 8th inning is high and tight, but maybe the umpire realized because he made up for it by calling the second pitch a ball.
Finally, in the 9th inning David Ortiz gets the call of ball 1 despite the location of the pitch.
So that's ten calls to Red Sox batters. 6 of them got pitches in the strike zone called balls. 3 of them got pitches called strikes when out of the zone, and Nick Green got one of each. To take a look at some other calls to Red Sox batters click here.
Now, the Orioles. In this game I counted six O's batters that were clearly had pitches called incorrectly, and eight that could be considered borderline. That's 14 out of 35 plate appearances (40%).
In the first inning, Brian Roberts gets the call on the third pitch despite its location.
Nick Markakis also catches a break with the fourth pitch here in the 4th inning.
In the 4th inning, Aubrey Huff takes pitches 2 and 3 for ridiculous strikes before chasing a ball for the K.
Here in the 4th inning Nolan Reimold gets a charitable call on pitch 2.
Adam Jones gets the Pedroia treatment in the 8th inning.
Aubrey Huff just can't get a break as the 2nd pitch is absurdly called a strike.
So that's six batters with questionable calls for the O's. 4 went the O's way while Aubrey Huff got screwed. To look at some more click here.
So overall the umpiring for the first game was inconsistent but didn't really appear to favor either team. At least, not from what I could tell from my crack Game Day investigation. While doing this I started to wonder what the across the board percentage is for pitches called correctly. If you go by number of batters in this game, the umpires got a call wrong on about 40% of them, which seems pretty high. But I'd imagine if you went by the number of pitches thrown, the number wouldn't seem that bad. What is considered a normal margin of error?
Next up, Game 2! It's uglier than this one.
FanPosts are user-created content and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of Camden Chat or SB Nation. They might, though.
1 recs |
9 comments
Comments
It's just disgusting
Jioe Flaacco, Hon!!! "He’s like a live JUGS machine."
by dayzd toe on Jul 2, 2009 11:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Just a note and some links....
…so I decided to do a little investigation via MLB’s Game Day. Obviously it’s not a science with them; they are only as good as whoever is entering the data.
It actually is a science with them. Gameday pitch charts are generated automatically by the Pitch f/x cameras which are now in all 30 ballparks.
The introduction of Pitch f/x (Slate).
Information about Zone Evaluation, software which analyzes umpires’ performances based on Pitch f/x Data (NY Times). This season, Zone Evaluation replaced Questec, which had only been in a third of the parks.
The Gameday data, which is pulled from the Pitych f/x system, can be downloaded into Excel and converted to graphs. Some info about this here and here.
Tons of articles about analyzing Gameday data here.
This guy has made a web-based tool for making corrections to the data based on batter height and whatnot.
John Walsh at Hardball Times points out that the Gameday data is prone to error at times:
I’ve already mentioned the fact that the ball fraction for pitches right down the middle of the plate is not zero, in fact it’s about 5-6%. Can umpires be missing these easy calls so frequently? It seems hard to believe. The alternative explanation is that there is some problem with the data.
I believe we can settle this issue by studying carefully the data, but a detailed investigation will have to wait for another day. As a first look, I have watched video of a half-dozen of these pitches that were measured to be right down the pipe, but were called balls.
What I found was this: a few of these were clearly outside the strike zone, a couple were borderline, none were right down the middle. And if you doubt my pitch-calling ability using mlb.tv on my little computer screen, all I can say is that one pitch whose recorded location was right in the heart of the strike zone, was actually an intentional ball that was thrown two feet off the plate!
Lastly, as we can see from the official website, even MLB has no idea what the strike zone is:

June 30, 2009 — Birdland Day
by zknower on Jul 2, 2009 12:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So it's scientific, but not necessarily accurate
Good to know :-)
That query website is cool. I’ve never seen that before.
I will lead these Peoples to the promised land, also known as "Slightly Ahead of the Blue Jays." ~WietersRunDry
by Stacey on Jul 2, 2009 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My guess for the IBB
is that the system couldn’t “find” the ball since it was so far outside, and that it just defaults to down the middle instead of spitting out something like “Where the F is the ball?” Stupid software enginerds….
by wishEYEhadCRABS on Jul 2, 2009 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You gotta wonder...
Once they satisfactorily get the glitches out of the system, will they ever institute a review system on bad pitch calls? Or just have all the calls made by the pitch track?
Just because you know how to read, doesn't mean you'll like the book.
by arlingtonOsFan on Jul 2, 2009 5:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I hope it's not if, but when
Maybe not this decade, but eventually a system to automatically call balls/strikes will be implemented. I’m actually surprised that the system discussed above is so buggy, they must not have worked very long on it. Or the effort is being sabotaged by the ump’s union
by wishEYEhadCRABS on Jul 2, 2009 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ugh no
balls and strikes should never be called by an automated system. that’s just changing the game too much. there’s no system in the world that can correctly get the "midpoint between batter’s waistand and shoulders in the stance" for every at bat.
no, what should happen is they should use this data to review games afterwards and fire the shitty umpires. once you’ve only got good umpiires working (and there are PLENTY of them out there), this problem goes away.
June 30, 2009 — Birdland Day
by zknower on Jul 2, 2009 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But what would C.B. Bucknor do then?
Be a terrible Little League umpire?
" I'm happy to announce that we've made Adam Jones our 4th and 5th starting pitcher as well as bench coach and team chaplain" - peter_angelos 8:04 AM May 14th from digsby
"Matt Wieters Adopted Mark Texiera's Parents Because He Felt They Needed A Son To Be Proud Of."
by getxstoked on Jul 2, 2009 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about using the system as a guideline...
A little beeper on the ump’s waist that tells him ball or strike, he still makes the actual call himself. I think this solves the worst problem, which I’m convinced is that umps sometimes get distracted (or blink, or whatever) for a split second at the critical moment and then guess on the pitch. There’s no way these umps can hold focus perfectly, I mean 50% of kids these days have ADD…and some of those calls are just absurd. I also would like to point out again that the chances that bad calls have always been a problem are high, we only fret about it more now because of all the new technology that lets us know there are bad calls…why don’t we use that technology to correct the problem?
Just because you know how to read, doesn't mean you'll like the book.
by arlingtonOsFan on Jul 13, 2009 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs






























