I can't believe that's true, just due to probability and such, but it's Bucknor so I totally believe it. I'm assuming that's counting ST too...has to be, yeah? ETA: so saw the story...he had *only* 6 pitches overturned in the game today. Video of the calls at the link: https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/cb-bucknor-umpire-abs-system-mlb-reds-red-sox/
Yeah it has to be the duration of all games including spring training. Did Angel retire cause he's be right up there with cb
Angel got suspended or "removed from duty" (quasi-fired) and then sued MLB. They settled it out of court and he politely retired.
Less than 2 per game? I mortgage my house to take the over on that one. I put the over/under at 500, just over 3 per game. Caveat: if he calls many Astros games then its closer to 0. Edit: I just realized he only calls Home plate 1 in 4 games, closer to 40 games per season. 250 is too good of a line - I pass on that bet.
Wasn't sure where to put this and didn't want to start a separate thread. I did some brief analysis on how the teams who are projected to be significantly better than Houston this season were built, focused on each team's projected 6 best hitters and 6 best pitchers. Here's the output: Spoiler: How the best projected teams were built Dodgers: Hitters: 2 Large Free Agent contracts (>$100M), 3 Large Extensions (>$100M), 1 International signee. Pitchers: 3 Large Free Agent contracts, 1 Large Extension, 1 Draftee, 1 Medium Free Agent Contract ($50M-$100M) Blue Jays: Hitters: 2 Large Extensions, 1 Medium Free Agent contract, 1 Medium Extension ($50M-$100M), 1 Trade, 1 Minor league free agent Pitchers: 2 Large Free Agent Contracts, 2 Small Free Agent Contracts (<$50M), 1 Small Extension (<$50M), 1 draftee Yankees: Hitters: 1 Large Free Agent Contract, 1 Large Extension, 1 Small Free Agent Contract, 2 Draftees, 1 Trade Pitchers: 3 Large Free Agent Contracts, 1 Trade, 2 Draftees Mariners: Hitters: 2 trades, 1 Medium Free Agent contract, 1 Medium Extension, 1 International signee, 1 Draftee Pitchers: 4 Draftees, 1 Large Extension, 1 Trade Mets: Hitters: 2 Large Free Agent Contracts, 1 Large Extension, 2 Trades, 1 International Signee Pitchers: 2 Trades, 1 Large Free agent Contract, 1 International Signee, 1 Large Extension, 1 Small Extension Phillies: Hitters: 3 Large Free Agent Contracts, 3 Draftees Pitchers: 2 Trades, 1 Large Free Agent contract, 1 International signee, 1 Large Extension, 1 Small Extension Red Sox: Hitters: 2 Draftees, 2 Trades, 1 Large Free Agent Contract, 1 International Signee Pitchers: 1 Large Free Agent Contract, 2 Trades, 1 International Signee, 1 Large Extension, 1 Small Extension Here's how that looks for the Astros: Hitters: 3 Trades, 2 Large Extensions, 1 Draftee Pitchers: 2 Medium Free Agent Contracts, 1 Trade, 1 Draftee, 1 International Signee, 1 Medium Extension ($50M-$100M) Takeaways for me: The reason Astros are no longer elite isn't because they don't spend money. They have 2 big contracts (Altuve and Alvarez) and several medium-sized contracts; the Dodgers are on another level but otherwise Houston competes financially overall. No great team is built without big contracts in today's game. That said, The Blue Jays, Phillies, and Yankees each have 5-6 large contracts, whereas the Astros only have 2. The Dodgers have 8 large contracts. Every team is built with a variety of acquisition methods. No team has more than 5 draftees on their prime players list with <5 years of service time. The shortest path to Houston's offense being on par with the best teams in the league is for Cam Smith to make the jump to superstardom and be a Kyle Tucker level player. The path for Houston's pitching to be on par is for Imai and Burrows to have the secret sauce poured on them and be 3+ win guys.
My only critique of this is defining large without converting it to an annualized measure. Ignoring the value wasted in non-performing years ignores efficiency. It feeds into the idea that the only thing worth managing is immediate (or tactical) success rather than longer term (strategic or sustainable) success. It's a very NFL all in for a single Championship way of looking at it. But it is a preference of your definition of successful management which I critique, not methodology.
It's hard to imagine a worse challenge scenario: non-controversial pitch, 0-1 count, 1st inning, 1 out, no one on base. The only reason to challenge was that it was Judge, I guess.
Cal was great at deceiving the umps with quick moves/framing. Perhaps he's not handling that adjustment all that well. That "art" by itself (as catchers have become exceedingly good at it, and I don't blame the umpires for that deception... they can only see so much) is enough to make ABS mandatory. I know everybody gets nostalgic about the "human element"... but the human element also involves new ways to try and deceive officials (hence why flopping and foul-baiting exists). Any objective system/technology that can get rid of all of that stuff is a positive IMO.
I just don’t think the virtual strike zone framework used by ABS is as perfectly accurate as everyone wants to believe. I am against ABS and robot umps but I’ll admit it’s been fun to watch and opens up so many possibilities and strategies about when to utilize it.
What makes you suspect that? I do know that players had their actual heights this off-season adjusted to further the accuracy of it. Also, K-zone came out in the late 90’s, early 2000’s. They’ve had almost 30 years to develop a virtual zone that intends to be as accurate as what the rules book describe the zone as. Muck like Tennis’ system (that went through several iterations), I expect this to get better with more versions and eventually become the standard (no challenges).
