View Poll Results: Time to use the K-Zone to call balls and strikes

Voters
56. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES (We have the technology, time to use it)

    43 76.79%
  • NO (I prefer the human element, good or bad)

    13 23.21%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 153
  1. #51
    Word of the Year is Complicit ojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Canada's basement

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by ClownPickle View Post
    Bad analogy. I'm not looking to standardize bat length or weight.


    You’re looking to normalize for height. It’s stupid. Go back to the lab and think up something else.
    This is not America...No! https://youtu.be/neLXqbR_r0E

  2. #52
    NYYF Legend

    ClownPickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by ojo View Post


    You’re looking to normalize for height. It’s stupid. Go back to the lab and think up something else.
    'Normalize for height?' You are trying too hard here.

    I'd prefer a standard zone using the average height of players. Why should the pitchers be the ones to adjust? Makes no sense. Far less players would be impacted this way.

    Why should Aaron Judge have a larger strike zone than Altuve? The only reason the top and bottom of the zone was defined that way was to provide umpires with a frame of reference.
    Calmer than you are

    7/30/2017: The day the Minnesota Twins bought a prospect from the New York Yankees.

  3. #53
    NYYF Legend

    sjb23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Jacksonville, Fl

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bub View Post
    I can understand.....the older fans, who would rather keep things the way they are.
    MLB doesn't care about the older fans. Older fans will just die off.....
    "Somebody once asked me if I ever went up to the plate trying to hit a home run. I said, 'Sure, every time.'" -- Mickey Mantle

  4. #54
    NYYF Legend

    longtimeyankeefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    The eternal state of optimism that the Yankees will win it all

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nome View Post
    We can also implement technology to have an electronic chip in the baseball, the gloves and the bases so all the decisions can be made by electronics and eliminate the umps.


    No thanks , we may as well as play the games with robots.


    I like the human element as flawed as it might be and I don't want to see it eroded more than it has been with instant replay. I was never a fan of fantasy baseball or computer baseball but it seems as if many of you want to go that way.


    No please leave the game alone. I love it the way it is. I loved it when pitchers got away with spitballs, emery balls, the players and or managers kicking dirt on umpires, disputing calls and getting thrown out of games I love the smell of the freshly mown grass when I go to Yankee stadium, I love the sights and sounds of a bat hitting a baseball, I love the chatter of the players and the fans. Take that away and what do we have? Not baseball As I knew it..


    Leave the game that I grew up with alone


    Andy


    My feelings exactly - thanks for expressing it so eloquently.
    Forgive me for taking the Contrarian view

  5. #55

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    I voted against robo-umps, despite being a stats-oriented fan under the age of 40.

    I don't buy the reasoning that insists that the shortcomings of human umpires harm the sport's meritocratic competitive structure. Baseball is all about non-standardization and unevenness, from varying ballpark sizes with individual quirks and homepark advantage to the dozens of rule changes that happen every couple decades that baseball fans like to pretend never occurred, as we insist on comparing statistics and accomplishments across eras (number of innings, mitts (!) and helmets, games per full season, mound height, league divisions and the wild card, expansion teams and the unbalanced schedule, desegregation and international players, player amenities and boarding, training and chewing tobacco and PEDs, and the fibers of the baseball itself).

    Indeed, people are proposing a rule change supposedly in order to be "truer" to the game, arguably a contradiction in itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nome View Post
    I like the human element as flawed as it might be and I don't want to see it eroded more than it has been with instant replay.
    ...

    No please leave the game alone. I love it the way it is. I loved it when pitchers got away with spitballs, emery balls, the players and or managers kicking dirt on umpires, disputing calls and getting thrown out of games I love the smell of the freshly mown grass when I go to Yankee stadium, I love the sights and sounds of a bat hitting a baseball, I love the chatter of the players and the fans. Take that away and what do we have? Not baseball As I knew it..
    My first memory of baseball as a kid was watching a Yankees game on tv with my mother (who is from the Dominican) complaining about how the umpire had been paid off. To me, that rant and debate and is a central part of baseball. Baseball is a past-time and it is entertainment, just as much as it is a competitive sport. When the most mainstream parts of popular culture depict baseball---in cartoons, in music, in art, etc---so very often the depiction is of that stereotypical argument between an angry manager and the sentinel-like umpire, and of the manager being thrown out with dust being kicked in the air and a baseball cap being thrown on the ground. As more umpire duties become replaced by "perfect" automation, that popular depiction increasingly becomes outmoded and anachronistic, yet another sign of the ever-quickening departure of baseball from popular American consciousness.


    To add: I do think that it wouldnt be a bad idea for some of the worst umpires to be subject to removal or demotion to the minors (and perhaps promotion for good performance for other umps) based off of results from what the (admittedly still imperfect) PitchFX data says. But the umpire's role, whose best efforts will always inevitably introduce variability and chance, should--in my opinion---remain a central part of baseball.
    Last edited by SatchelPaigeYankee; 06-03-18 at 03:00 AM.
    “Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good, too.” – Yogi Berra

  6. #56

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bub View Post
    Umpires aren't ruining the game. They're the same umpires that have been used for over 100 years. The difference is that high definition tv, super slow motion and electronic strike boxes are making it easy to unveil their mistakes. A pitch 1 inch out of the strike zone used to be a very close pitch, and now it's a horrible call by a moronic, blind umpire. No question that today's technology can do a better job, but it does change the game by further removing the human element. I can understand anyone, especially the older fans, who would rather keep things the way they are.
    Those are very good points and all completely true, but that technology is precisely why I believe they're ruining the game. Throughout MLB history, having an umpire call balls and strikes was the only way to do it. If not for that, there would be no game, so that was the best option. Now with the advances in technology, umpires are not the best way to call balls and strikes. Using a method that isn't the best possible method at the current time and for the future devalues it. I know this isn't the same because it's a medical issue, but what if the NFL said helmet to helmet hits were legal again because that's the way it used to be and the lack of such hits changed the game. Knowing what we do now about concussions, watching players get jacked up and suffering head and neck injuries would completely devalue the game. It was fine before because we knew a lot less about concussions and other head injuries, but with all the knowledge we've gained, it's not acceptable now.

  7. #57
    NYYF Legend


    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    I live by the Sound

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by Meecham4ever View Post
    Joe West, the president of the Worst Umpires Association
    fixed

    Quote Originally Posted by sjb23 View Post
    MLB doesn't care about the older fans. Older fans will just die off.....
    News flash, younger fans will die off too, just takes a while longer...

    Older fans often have more disposable income and leisure time than younger fans, you can't build a fanbase around them (hello Florida teams) but MLB would be foolish not to care about tapping that $ource as long as it's there.

    Plus I doubt they'd lose any of them to robo-umps. Maybe some grousing but whatever, once you have baseball in your blood for multi-decades I doubt robo-umps would drive you from the game. Nobody buys tickets to see umps.

  8. #58
    NYYF Legend

    Nome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Branchburg, NJ 08876

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by Carsten Charles View Post
    Yeah nobody wants to get rid of that. We want to get rid of these stupid umpires that are ruining the game whether it's with bad calls or trying to make it all about them (Joe West, Angel Hernandez, etc.). Games being decided by these morons instead of it being decided of the players is a laughable thought process.





    Then get rid of the bad umps






    Andy
    Yogi is a National Treasure. Let's put him in a National Hall of Fame. The man has no peers.

  9. #59

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by JDPNYY View Post
    I have advocated this for a long time now. There is no reason not to do this.
    If/when MLb does this, then essentially MLb will be the least ref biased sport in usa. I’m 100% for this.
    https://gfycat.com/ComplexObedientArgusfish

  10. #60
    NYYF Legend

    Nome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Branchburg, NJ 08876

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by sjb23 View Post
    MLB doesn't care about the older fans. Older fans will just die off.....


    Contrary to the belief of the younger generation, they will die off also, they aren't immortal.


    Andy
    Yogi is a National Treasure. Let's put him in a National Hall of Fame. The man has no peers.

  11. #61
    NYYF Legend

    sjb23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Jacksonville, Fl

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by HelloNewman View Post
    News flash, younger fans will die off too, just takes a while longer...

    Older fans often have more disposable income and leisure time than younger fans, you can't build a fanbase around them (hello Florida teams) but MLB would be foolish not to care about tapping that $ource as long as it's there.

    Plus I doubt they'd lose any of them to robo-umps. Maybe some grousing but whatever, once you have baseball in your blood for multi-decades I doubt robo-umps would drive you from the game. Nobody buys tickets to see umps.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nome View Post
    Contrary to the belief of the younger generation, they will die off also, they aren't immortal.
    Andy
    Sorry. I was totally joking. I am an "older fan" myself.
    "Somebody once asked me if I ever went up to the plate trying to hit a home run. I said, 'Sure, every time.'" -- Mickey Mantle

  12. #62
    NYYF Legend


    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    I live by the Sound

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by sjb23 View Post
    Sorry. I was totally joking. I am an "older fan" myself.
    My bad, did not catch the sarcasm. whoosh for me.

  13. #63
    Tends to be difficult JL25and3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Quote Originally Posted by ClownPickle View Post
    'Normalize for height?' You are trying too hard here.

    I'd prefer a standard zone using the average height of players. Why should the pitchers be the ones to adjust? Makes no sense. Far less players would be impacted this way.

    Why should Aaron Judge have a larger strike zone than Altuve? The only reason the top and bottom of the zone was defined that way was to provide umpires with a frame of reference.
    Because it’s part of what pitchers do. They’re not trying to throw the ball through a tire, the're pitching to real batters.

  14. #64
    NYYF Legend

    NelsonMuntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Alexandria, VA

    Re: Time for a robe-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nome View Post
    We can also implement technology to have an electronic chip in the baseball, the gloves and the bases so all the decisions can be made by electronics and eliminate the umps.


    No thanks , we may as well as play the games with robots.


    I like the human element as flawed as it might be and I don't want to see it eroded more than it has been with instant replay. I was never a fan of fantasy baseball or computer baseball but it seems as if many of you want to go that way.


    No please leave the game alone. I love it the way it is. I loved it when pitchers got away with spitballs, emery balls, the players and or managers kicking dirt on umpires, disputing calls and getting thrown out of games I love the smell of the freshly mown grass when I go to Yankee stadium, I love the sights and sounds of a bat hitting a baseball, I love the chatter of the players and the fans. Take that away and what do we have? Not baseball As I knew it..


    Leave the game that I grew up with alone


    Andy
    Are you upset that basketball has a shot clock instead of a guy standing under the basket counting “one Mississippi...two Mississippi...three Mississippi...”
    David Ortiz tested positive for performance enhancing drugs in 2003.

  15. #65
    Word of the Year is Complicit ojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Canada's basement

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by ClownPickle View Post
    'Normalize for height?' You are trying too hard here.

    I'd prefer a standard zone using the average height of players. Why should the pitchers be the ones to adjust? Makes no sense. Far less players would be impacted this way.

    Why should Aaron Judge have a larger strike zone than Altuve? The only reason the top and bottom of the zone was defined that way was to provide umpires with a frame of reference.
    Except that’s what you’re doing by using an average height of players to determine a strike zone to be applied, regardless of height. It may not be normalization in a statistical sense, but it certainly is when you’re taking a wide range of heights and then determining the K zone from the ideal / target height.

    However, (inadvertantly or not) you touched on why such a rule change could make sense: and that’s to attract bigger athletes to the sport. Because at the end of the day, nobody gives a flying crap about Jose Altuve and his pursuit of a .350 batting average. They love to watch Aaron Judge crush home runs though.
    This is not America...No! https://youtu.be/neLXqbR_r0E

  16. #66
    NYYF Legend

    kan_t's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    You don't have to have robot ump. Technology is a way to help making the game better. The game includes ump and technology could also help them to call better strikes and balls. Nowadays we already have Google glass. The league and the ump union should explore how to use the technology to improve the game and make the ump performance better.

  17. #67
    NYYF Legend

    -tz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    NYC

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by kan_t View Post
    You don't have to have robot ump. Technology is a way to help making the game better. The game includes ump and technology could also help them to call better strikes and balls. Nowadays we already have Google glass. The league and the ump union should explore how to use the technology to improve the game and make the ump performance better.
    Two words: Pitching machines.

  18. #68

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by ClownPickle View Post
    'Normalize for height?' You are trying too hard here.

    I'd prefer a standard zone using the average height of players. Why should the pitchers be the ones to adjust? Makes no sense. Far less players would be impacted this way.

    Why should Aaron Judge have a larger strike zone than Altuve? The only reason the top and bottom of the zone was defined that way was to provide umpires with a frame of reference.

    That's incorrect. The strike zone, as it's written, stems from when the batter got to call for where he wanted the pitch. Either low -belt to knees-, or high -belt to chest-. When that rule was abolished the strike zone was made by combining the two areas.
    You’re inviting the world to bite your arse when you stick your head in the sand.’- Choss
    Thetripleplay.wordpress.com

  19. #69
    NYYF Legend

    ClownPickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by spanky185 View Post
    That's incorrect. The strike zone, as it's written, stems from when the batter got to call for where he wanted the pitch. Either low -belt to knees-, or high -belt to chest-. When that rule was abolished the strike zone was made by combining the two areas.
    Link?

    The first implementation of a strike zone was in 1887. Before 1887 batters would ask where they wanted the ball delivered and pitchers had to throw it there.
    http://www.banishedtothepen.com/a-hi...e-strike-zone/

    I'm not seeing this 'Either low -belt to knees-, or high -belt to chest- When that rule was abolished the strike zone was made by combining the two areas.'
    Calmer than you are

    7/30/2017: The day the Minnesota Twins bought a prospect from the New York Yankees.

  20. #70
    NYYF Legend

    ClownPickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Ah. Found it. Still think it's dumb the zone changes from batter to batter. It shouldn't be harder to pitch to a smaller hitter. Make it relative to the height of the plate.

    Baseball’s earliest years saw no semblance of a strike zone as we now know it. While the width of the plate has been a constant, in the late 1800s, the batter could call for a ‘high’ or ‘low’ zone. This reduced the size of the strike zone from between the shoulder and knee to half that size according to the preference each batter voiced. In 1887, hitters lost that beneficial clause when the rule changed and the zone included the entire area from the knee to the shoulder. This remained, at least in the stated rulings, unchanged until the 1950 season. That year, the rules lowered the top of the zone and defined it as between the armpits and the knees.

    The zone went back up to the shoulders briefly, starting in 1963, before restoring the armpit level as the high point in 1969.

    1988 saw a different type of update to the top, as the upper limit of the zone stopped at “a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants.” Finally, in 1996, baseball broke the previously established pattern of adjustments, as it left the upper limit static for once. This modification actually moved the lower level instead. The new boundary fell below the knees, to the ”hollow beneath the kneecap.”
    This is the current wording of the rule:
    https://www.fangraphs.com/tht/inside...e-strike-zone/
    Calmer than you are

    7/30/2017: The day the Minnesota Twins bought a prospect from the New York Yankees.

  21. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by ClownPickle View Post
    Ah. Found it. Still think it's dumb the zone changes from batter to batter. It shouldn't be harder to pitch to a smaller hitter.


    https://www.fangraphs.com/tht/inside...e-strike-zone/
    That goes both ways. It shouldn’t be tougher for a shorter hitter to hit. It makes sense adjusting to every batter.

  22. #72
    NYYF Legend

    ClownPickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by Carsten Charles View Post
    That goes both ways. It shouldn’t be tougher for a shorter hitter to hit. It makes sense adjusting to every batter.
    Yes, it should. Short people are always disadvantaged for sports. The pitcher shouldn't be penalized because you are a small person.
    Calmer than you are

    7/30/2017: The day the Minnesota Twins bought a prospect from the New York Yankees.

  23. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by ClownPickle View Post
    Yes, it should. Short people are always disadvantaged for sports. The pitcher shouldn't be penalized because you are a small person.
    I mean it would help us, but why should it be easier for Aaron Judge to hit than anyone else in the league? He shouldn’t gain an advantage because he’s tall. I can’t believe you’re even arguing this.

  24. #74
    NYYF Legend

    ClownPickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by Carsten Charles View Post
    I mean it would help us, but why should it be easier for Aaron Judge to hit than anyone else in the league? He shouldn’t gain an advantage because he’s tall. I can’t believe you’re even arguing this.
    Of course he should. Tall and strong people are always at an advantage in sports. Why should every pitcher have to adjust instead of just the few smaller guys?
    Calmer than you are

    7/30/2017: The day the Minnesota Twins bought a prospect from the New York Yankees.

  25. #75
    Administrator Bub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    The Boonies

    Re: Time for a robo-ump to call balls and strikes, YAY or NAY?

    Quote Originally Posted by ClownPickle View Post
    Of course he should. Tall and strong people are always at an advantage in sports. Why should every pitcher have to adjust instead of just the few smaller guys?
    Taking the extreme example of a very short player, say 5'2", you can't have his armpits be the top of the strike zone because it's extremely difficult to barrel up a baseball in that area, or get the bat around at all.
    Let the kids play.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts