Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

Home Plate Umps Should Be Replaced by Robots


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Sparty1045 said:

Looks like it’s showing the aftermath of the two seam breaking.  Look where the catcher is.  

The GIF don't lie...

barnes-odor2.gif.ef36d2180c787441a0dbc5b01244e4ea.gif

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 225
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I've been a baseball fan for 35 years. I want robots calling strikes.  Umps are less accurate and have biases. Some of their egos are getting to be a bit much now too, which is the worst part.

Overhead view. If you think this "two seamer" ever crosses the plate, then I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.    

Also handing out new baseballs, dusting off the plate, and giving the catchers someone to talk to in between PAs.  No jobs eliminated, just computers helping them do their existing job like they do fo

Posted Images

6 minutes ago, Sparty1045 said:

Looks like it hits the corner when it crosses the plate.

Overhead view.

barnes-odor3.gif.d18abfb2eadccdf0237e0e688d3511e7.gif

If you think this "two seamer" ever crosses the plate, then I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

Overhead view.

barnes-odor3.gif.d18abfb2eadccdf0237e0e688d3511e7.gif

If you think this "two seamer" ever crosses the plate, then I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

 

Touché my friend.  The other views make it look different because where the catchers glove is.

That is a two seamer though.  I got one thing right.

Edited by Sparty1045
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Sparty1045 said:

Touché my friend.  The other views make it look different because where the catchers glove is.

That is a two seamer though.  I got one thing right.

Do you even watch baseball? Two seamer? 85mph two seamer? 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Backdoor Slider said:

That ump had what’s almost the equivalent of a perfect game going prior to that call. Doesn’t get much better.

 

Hmm...I'm a bit of a skeptic but, three different instances, all to Yankees hitters with men on base...someone had some dough on the game. 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Every year this comes up and every year it's pointed out that the high/low strike can change with every pitch, which is better suited to a human. But I don't think it would hurt to give the umpire some computer help with the inside/outside strike calls as long as the technology can allow for the call to be immediately made when runners are on base. 

1 hour ago, tonycpsu said:

Uh, the on-screen graphics show where the ball is when it crosses the plate.  Has been that way for years.

The plate is 2 dimensional plane though. Not a 1 dimensional line. If the dot pops off the square when the ball reaches the front of the plate, it could still break into the strike zone before it gets all the way past it. The reverse would be true if you decided to mark the dot when the ball hits the back point of the plate. 

That pitch to Odor was a ball, yeah. Just saying, just because that dot is inside/outside the box doesn't necessarily mean the ball could never have crossed the plate,especially for a breaking ball. 

tldr: giving the ump computer help for the inside/outside strike could be useful if the technology allows for an instant call. The high/low strike, not so much. 

Edited by Fiveohnine
Link to post
Share on other sites

MLB already tracks a zone top and bottom for each player.  It's trivial to use that data to adjust the top and bottom of the zone so that Aaron Judge and Jose Altuve have the strike zones they should.  The idea that fallible humans will do a better job of this than the computer that just knows exactly within a fraction of an inch where the top of that batter's zone should be is... not convincing to me.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Will robots do a better job? Yes. I still don't want them. Human umpires and their fallibility is part of the charm of the game. That's my subjective opinion. 

Let's have a few aspects of our lives that aren't completely taken over by technology.

Angel Hernandez's job depends on it, goddamit.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gandalfthecat said:

Will robots do a better job? Yes. I still don't want them. Human umpires and their fallibility is part of the charm of the game. That's my subjective opinion. 

This is an opinion I don't agree with, but can definitely respect...

Just now, Gandalfthecat said:

Angel Hernandez's job depends on it, goddamit.

Until I read this part. :)

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

MLB already tracks a zone top and bottom for each player.  It's trivial to use that data to adjust the top and bottom of the zone so that Aaron Judge and Jose Altuve have the strike zones they should.  The idea that fallible humans will do a better job of this than the computer that just knows exactly within a fraction of an inch where the top of that batter's zone should be is... not convincing to me.

I said it can change with every pitch. Not every hitter. Many hitters change their approach/stance depending on the count. The high low strike is based on the position of the hitter at the moment he is "prepared to swing" which can change multiple times in one AB. That requires a human on every pitch. Not a computer's predetermined "top and bottom data for each player".

Juan Soto for example has a totally different stance/approach with 2 strikes. 

Edited by Fiveohnine
Link to post
Share on other sites

The sum of all errors made in a game by the average ump, which will count errors on inside and outside pitches, not just high and low, is going to be a lot more than the number of times the computer makes a mistake on a high or low strike because a batter happened to be in a slightly different position than what was in the system.  It's just not a credible argument to say otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tonycpsu said:

The sum of all errors made in a game by the average ump, which will count errors on inside and outside pitches, not just high and low, is going to be a lot more than the number of times the computer makes a mistake on a high or low strike because a batter happened to be in a slightly different position than what was in the system.  It's just not a credible argument to say otherwise.

using static, predetermined data to determine a high/low strike zone that changes with every pitch makes error 100% certain. You may or may not be correct that a human would be worse anyway.

But it's not a "credible argument" to say that the computer's predetermined data would be 100% certain to be incorrect once Juan Soto reaches 2 strikes. It's just a fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens when a batter is intentionally hit by a pitcher and charges the mound? Will the robot speed out to the mound and neutralize him? Come on man this is a game played by humans..

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fiveohnine said:

using static, predetermined data to determine a high/low strike zone that changes with every pitch makes error 100% certain. You may or may not be correct that a human would be worse anyway.

It turns out MLB actually is tracking the top and bottom of the zone on each pitch already, and it's available on Baseball Savant for anyone to see.  Here's the data for Aaron Judge:

image.png.6a433ff2296058ca5ae46c14aab9cb00.png

And Altuve:

image.thumb.png.6b2b3e9885e1e44102125296e5dc4253.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

It turns out MLB actually is tracking the top and bottom of the zone on each pitch already, and it's available on Baseball Savant for anyone to see.  Here's the data for Aaron Judge:

Unless you're saying a human didn't gather this data and/or determine the moment Judge/Altuve was prepared to swing, you're making my point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Fiveohnine said:

Unless you're saying a human didn't gather this data and/or determine the moment Judge/Altuve was prepared to swing, you're making my point. 

I'm saying the errors made by a human who is sitting in a booth looking *at* the batter on a video screen and has only one job -- to measure the vertical boundaries of the zone -- will be smaller than the errors made by an ump who has to do that from a spot behind and offset horizontally from the batter, while also trying to judge the vertical position, horizontal position, whether the batter swings, whether the ball hit the batter, whether there's a foul tip...  I think that case is pretty clear, yeah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fbaseballgod said:

Out of curiosity, how would they determine the Zone for a rookie or new player?

Apparently there's someone in the booth from MLB doing it for each pitch on a video screen in more or less real time.  Any concerns about this taking a couple of extra seconds and delaying the calls could be easily addressed by having the ump call the game as usual and allow challenges that are quickly resolved by going to the computer.  Most pitches aren't borderline calls.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...