The Yankees, the Cubs, and Early-Season Team Framing

All we want are numbers that matter, beyond the numbers that matter. Wins and losses are already in the books, and in certain cases teams have already significantly changed their own playoff odds, but we’re all waiting for the point at which we can do some meaningful analysis. The sample sizes thus far are incredibly small, and this is a big reason why people are paying so much attention to pitcher fastball velocities — that’s one of the only things that stabilizes almost immediately. Velocity is entirely up to the one guy. The numbers that stabilize fastest tend to be the numbers relying on the fewest players.

But you can also look at numbers that build sample sizes quickly. Like, say, pitch-by-pitch numbers, since there are hundreds of pitches in each game. What that suggests is that it’s not entirely too early to look at 2014 pitch-framing statistics, and there’s evidence to believe this carries over well even over small samples. And in the early, early going, Yankees pitchers have worked with the most favorable strike zone, while Cubs pitchers have done the very opposite of that. I hope you like framing content, because this summer we’re probably going to beat it to death. So, actually, I hope you don’t like framing content? Whatever, here comes data.

Following is a table of called strikes above or below the expected average, given pitch locations. Data’s shown on the team level, and it comes courtesy of Matthew Carruth’s pitch-framing model. The average run value of an extra strike is in the vicinity of 0.14 runs, but pitches get called strikes and balls under varying circumstances, so at this point I’m personally more interested in just the strikes totals.

Team Sample +Strikes
Yankees 592 25
Astros 687 22
D-backs 612 16
Rays 722 12
Brewers 567 11
Padres 528 10
Red Sox 557 9
Pirates 549 7
Cardinals 593 5
Mets 554 3
Royals 579 2
Marlins 537 1
Rangers 665 1
Orioles 654 -1
White Sox 699 -1
Mariners 426 -2
Athletics 506 -4
Blue Jays 682 -4
Braves 476 -4
Giants 595 -5
Tigers 442 -6
Nationals 545 -7
Angels 679 -10
Indians 634 -10
Phillies 555 -10
Reds 596 -10
Rockies 674 -10
Twins 593 -10
Dodgers 568 -12
Cubs 614 -19

“Sample” refers to the number of called pitches, those being balls or strikes not swung at. Missing, of course, is data from the two games played in Sydney. Samples range from just a little over 400 to a little over 700, so it’s clearly early — I don’t need to tell you it’s early — but while all these numbers need to be regressed, so far the Cubs have been giving away the most strikes, while the Yankees have been earning the most extra strikes. The Cubs are in last by seven pitches, and while the Yankees are in first by just three, their sample is also 95 pitches smaller than Houston’s.

Is what we see surprising? Not that much. Francisco Cervelli has been a good receiver in the past, and the Yankees brought in Brian McCann, who’s long been one of the best. Welington Castillo has a history of being below-average. The Rays, Brewers, Padres, and Pirates are up near the top, as we’d expect. It’s not a shock to see the Rockies, Twins, and Dodgers around the bottom. Of course — of course — there’s noise here, and the order is going to change between now and the end of the season, but it’s remarkable to me how quickly some of these framing numbers are getting toward their own level.

Carruth measures strikes above or below average per game. I found all the individual catchers who caught at least 1,000 called pitches a year ago, and who have also caught at least 100 called pitches this year. Today is April 9, and there are more than 150 games left for every team, but we can already see some pretty good agreement, even without any sort of adjustment made for pitcher identities:

receiving20132014

This quickly, we can get an r value of 0.60. For the sake of comparison, I looked at every hitter who batted at least 200 times last year, and who has batted at least 30 times this year. For walk rate, there’s an r value of 0.34. For strikeout rate, there’s an r value of 0.43. For ISO, there’s an r value of 0.33. For wRC+, there’s an r value of 0.12. We know not to think too much about early-season wRC+, because it doesn’t have much predictive power, because it doesn’t relate well to the recent past. There’s already a fairly strong relationship between the framing numbers, and that suggests it isn’t too soon to put some stock in them.

Let’s do a quick comparison. Now, two charts, the first showing called balls and strikes thrown by the Yankees, and the second showing called balls and strikes thrown by the Cubs. The black zone box is just a simple approximation, and not to be read into too deeply.

nyypitchers

chcpitchers

Almost everything in the zone thrown by the Yankees has been a strike, and there’s considerable extension to the left, presumably capturing some of those lefty strikes. With the Cubs, there are more balls in the zone, and there are fewer strikes out of it. Carruth compares data to the strike zones as they’re actually called by umpires. On the team level, the Yankees have had about 6% in-zone balls, and about 11% out-of-zone strikes. The Cubs have had about 20% in-zone balls, and about 7% out-of-zone strikes. It’s early, but not too early to think that could be meaningful.

As always, I have to note that there’s a pitcher-command component at play here, and I don’t think it would be unreasonable to suggest Yankees pitchers, on average, have had and will continue to have better command than Cubs pitchers. Also, it’s early enough that there could be some umpire influence in the data. But I’m comfortable asserting this much: based on the data we already have, it looks like the Yankees will pitch to a favorable strike zone. And it looks like the Cubs will not. And in between the present extremes, there are other numbers worth paying attention to. We’ll revisit this pretty often over the course of the year, but for the time being, there’s probably more substance in this leaderboard than in most of the other ones you can find around.




Print This Post



Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.

18 Responses to “The Yankees, the Cubs, and Early-Season Team Framing”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. Brian McCann says:

    You gotta catch the ball the RIGHT WAY!

    +18 Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. Kevin says:

    someone should do a study on the varying effectiveness of pitch framing by pitch location. pretty easy to predict that outside corner pitches are where the most value is to be gained, but i’d be interested in high-low framing as well. Sabathia’s mid-shin strikes versus the blue jays on the weekend were a travesty.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. TtD says:

    Strangely enough three of the top four on you’re list have played the Jays so far, whom have been getting absolutely mauled by the umpires. Would be curious as to if this is simply down to facing good framing teams by sheer fluke, or whether the Jays themselves have some effect on framing. BBB have actually been tracking net ball/strike gain for the Jays on eggregious calls (strikes on balls not in the zone at all/balls on strikes fully in the zone) all season and have them at a ghastly net -32 through 8 games.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Gerse says:

      To clarify: the -32 is net effect of both teams from the Jays perspective. I have the Jays at -16 and the opponents at +16 (purely coincidental that both have the same absolute value)

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  4. Tyler says:

    Is there data available measuring pitch location vs. where the catcher set his glove, to see how good a pitcher is at hitting the intended spot? Would this information even be valuable?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  5. MSpitz says:

    Funny how 2 of the first 3 comments are about the Jays, and once I started reading this article I knew I was going to comment on the strike zone in the Jays-Astros game last night. Buehrle didn’t get any calls around the upper corners of the plate, Loup threw a fastball right down the pipe for a ball, while the Astros pitchers got ~10 called strikes below the knees (including one nearly in the dirt!).

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  6. Grimace says:

    What’s the conversation like on quantifying the value of this stuff? It’s got to be much more complicated than “he cost us 10 in-zone strikes and 20-out-of-zone balls that are called strikes by an average receiver, which amounts to 10 outs so it’s -[x] WAR,” no?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  7. Conspiracy theorist says:

    Any way to compare whether there is team-specific bias going on? Do the Cubs get less strikes called above and beyond the skill of their receivers because they’ve been recently awful at baseball? Does McCann benefit from more called strikes now that he catches for the Yankees?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  8. Baltar says:

    Among the present leaders, the Rays are there to stay and perhaps the Yankees. McCann is so good at the plate and behind the plate that it’s scary–like Yadier.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  9. econometrician says:

    The problem here is that different umps have different strike zones, and even though there have been a bunch of pitches through 7 or 8 games, they haven’t been in front of many different umpires. If you were running this as a regression, you’d have to cluster your standard errors. I’d bet solid money that if you did this, none of your results would be significant.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  10. RC says:

    Is there any correction for counts here?

    We know that the strikezone gets larger in 3 ball counts and smaller in 2 strike counts. There’s a possibility that a lot of this might be influenced by that.

    IE, facing a team that walks a lot (and thus gets into a lot of 3 ball counts) is going to expand the effective strike zone, and make your framing look better. Facing a team that hacks a lot is going to lead to a lot of 2 strike counts, a shrinking strikezone, and worse pitch framing stats.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  11. Kiss my Go Nats says:

    Assuming he hits as well or better than he did last year, the Astro’a Castro seems like a legit all star catcher right now! Nice to know even the worst team has a very good player.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *