Who doesn't like stuff like this?

https://twitter.com/RoutineBaseball/sta ... call-video

nobody on p32 of this threat that's for sure!

Uncle Milty wrote:So you'd rather have refs with a stop watch for the shot clock in basketball and play clock in football?

Clocks are a little different, I'll grant you. But bitching about balls and strikes is as old as baseball. I dunno, I don't really feel the need for it to change.

It's part of the game.

If they are trying to get the younger generation into baseball more, they need to modernize the game imo. Old timers love the balls and strikes being part of the game, younger fans not so much. It's the reason why sports have expanded instant replay pretty much across the board. It is why at some point the NFL will have a chip in the ball to be used for TD's and possibly first downs.

Get the calls right, I don't want some middle age umpire squeezing my pitcher because he has some sort of grudge with a certain player or an ego so big that he has to become part of the game.

Wolfgang622 wrote:

phillychuck wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:Technology probably isn't there yet but need to get rid of umps and just have a robot behind the plate. Or the ump sits back there and handles the balls and strikes based off of an earpiece or something. Might help speed up things.

Earpiece for the umps to "advise" on strike zone. Would certainly stop the bitching, at least a bit. Gotta do that soon. And using it to "advise" the umps making their calls should placate the union.

I really don't get the desire for robot umpires. Baseball or nay sport's charm is that it is a human achievement. Umpires/refs have always been a part of it. If i wanted to watch robots do things, including call a game, I'd watch video games instead.

I feel ya, but I think at this point in time it can affect how people feel about the integrity of the game. A few years back, an umpire makes a call, the batter thinks he's wrong, some fans think he's wrong, everyone beefs about it, but who's to say whether it was even wrong? With the pitch track technology (even though I agree that it doesn't always uniformly reflect a correct strike zone), everyone in the stadium looking at their f'n phone thinks they have the pitch right, and it's only the one guy that matters who's preventing the call from being correct. Add to that that hitters are more aware of the need to control the strike zone and draw walks then ever before. Whereas before being rung up on a bad pitch might be seen as due to bad luck and the batter's inability to put the ball in play, with drawing a walk now so much more often an intentional play, it now seems almost equal to the injustice of having a base hit drop into center field, but having the batter arbitrarily called out for no reason. In both cases, you end up with spectators and players feeling like they are not being treated to a fair contest, and that can't be good for the sport long-term.

tl;dr : eh, it didn't really matter when tennis did it

heyeaglefn wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

phillychuck wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:Technology probably isn't there yet but need to get rid of umps and just have a robot behind the plate. Or the ump sits back there and handles the balls and strikes based off of an earpiece or something. Might help speed up things.

Earpiece for the umps to "advise" on strike zone. Would certainly stop the bitching, at least a bit. Gotta do that soon. And using it to "advise" the umps making their calls should placate the union.

I really don't get the desire for robot umpires. Baseball or nay sport's charm is that it is a human achievement. Umpires/refs have always been a part of it. If i wanted to watch robots do things, including call a game, I'd watch video games instead.

I'd rather them get the call right. I guess people just like to have things to bitch about but if the Phillies got screwed on a bad call in an important game we wouldn't hear the end of it.

Other sports are trying to take the refs out of it as much as possible because the fact is they screw up a lot no matter how good they are.

Automated balls and strikes would forever change the catcher position. No need for good defense and pitch-framing ability anymore. It would become more of an offensive position where speed/ability to throw runners out would be the only defensive skill required. They'd probably start setting up completely differently behind the plate too. Almost like a pitch-out on every pitch. Always trying to receive the ball in the best position possible to throw. Would be wild for sure.

WhiteyFan wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

phillychuck wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:Technology probably isn't there yet but need to get rid of umps and just have a robot behind the plate. Or the ump sits back there and handles the balls and strikes based off of an earpiece or something. Might help speed up things.

Earpiece for the umps to "advise" on strike zone. Would certainly stop the bitching, at least a bit. Gotta do that soon. And using it to "advise" the umps making their calls should placate the union.

I really don't get the desire for robot umpires. Baseball or nay sport's charm is that it is a human achievement. Umpires/refs have always been a part of it. If i wanted to watch robots do things, including call a game, I'd watch video games instead.

I'd rather them get the call right. I guess people just like to have things to bitch about but if the Phillies got screwed on a bad call in an important game we wouldn't hear the end of it.

Other sports are trying to take the refs out of it as much as possible because the fact is they screw up a lot no matter how good they are.

Automated balls and strikes would forever change the catcher position. No need for good defense and pitch-framing ability anymore. It would become more of an offensive position where speed/ability to throw runners out would be the only defensive skill required. They'd probably start setting up completely differently behind the plate too. Almost like a pitch-out on every pitch. Always trying to receive the ball in the best position possible to throw. Would be wild for sure.

Yeah the catcher position would be a consideration, I assume they would have to come up with some rules on how to handle that. Hopefully that would be a bigger hang up then wanting to have missed calls be part of the game for whatever reason.

huh? Nothing would change other than the 'pitch framing' aspect. still gotta prevent the ball from going to the backstop. (PHILLES CATCHERS TAKE NOTE!). Still gotta give a target to the pitcher. Still gotta hold on to foul tips. Nothing much changes.

WhiteyFan wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

phillychuck wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:Technology probably isn't there yet but need to get rid of umps and just have a robot behind the plate. Or the ump sits back there and handles the balls and strikes based off of an earpiece or something. Might help speed up things.

Earpiece for the umps to "advise" on strike zone. Would certainly stop the bitching, at least a bit. Gotta do that soon. And using it to "advise" the umps making their calls should placate the union.

I really don't get the desire for robot umpires. Baseball or nay sport's charm is that it is a human achievement. Umpires/refs have always been a part of it. If i wanted to watch robots do things, including call a game, I'd watch video games instead.

I'd rather them get the call right. I guess people just like to have things to bitch about but if the Phillies got screwed on a bad call in an important game we wouldn't hear the end of it.

Other sports are trying to take the refs out of it as much as possible because the fact is they screw up a lot no matter how good they are.

Automated balls and strikes would forever change the catcher position. No need for good defense and pitch-framing ability anymore. It would become more of an offensive position where speed/ability to throw runners out would be the only defensive skill required. They'd probably start setting up completely differently behind the plate too. Almost like a pitch-out on every pitch. Always trying to receive the ball in the best position possible to throw. Would be wild for sure.

That would clearly lead to more wild pitches though, will teams be willing to risk more wild pitches to try to stop base stealers

I think it could evolve to where a catcher can catch a pitch in a slightly different position then they do today. Maybe not fully standing up but more in a standing position then they do today.

heyeaglefn wrote:I think it could evolve to where a catcher can catch a pitch in a slightly different position then they do today. Maybe not fully standing up but more in a standing position then they do today.

Sounds like a that’ll be a problem with balls in the dirt, will probably also lead to catchers tipping pitches by their positioning

Ace Rothstein wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:I think it could evolve to where a catcher can catch a pitch in a slightly different position then they do today. Maybe not fully standing up but more in a standing position then they do today.

Sounds like a that’ll be a problem with balls in the dirt, will probably also lead to catchers tipping pitches by their positioning

Yeah I don't think it would have an impact right away but in 10-15 years who knows. I think if the technology was ready they would think about it but I don't know that it is ready yet or even being worked on.

Bucky wrote:huh? Nothing would change other than the 'pitch framing' aspect.

This is 90% of catching nowadays.

heyeaglefn wrote:I think it could evolve to where a catcher can catch a pitch in a slightly different position then they do today. Maybe not fully standing up but more in a standing position then they do today.

Just like old times:

SABR Defensive Index as of July 15.

Jake Arrieta(!) toward top of pitchers' list. No Phillies among top 25 in league. Only other ones with positive numbers are Velazquez, Pivetta and Santana. Hoskins dead last in left field by a lot, Franco next to last at 3b.

so our eyes are correct

also, why is matt chapman so high

pacino wrote:also, why is matt chapman so high

Just finished finals? I dunno.

Mike Moustakas at 2.1. Machado at -10.5 FWIW.

Until someone explains how shifts fit in to these defense stats, I remain skeptical.