The Other Mysterious Framing Declines
On Monday, while investigating Jonathan Lucroy’s mysterious framing decline, I noted that Buster Posey and Yadier Molina have also had noticeable falls from the framing elite this season.
Posey ranked as the game’s best framing catcher last season (26.5 framing runs), according to Baseball Prospectus , and has fallen to 28th thus far this season, with just 0.5 framing runs to his credit. Molina has fallen from ninth last season (9.0 framing runs) to 38th (with a mark of -0.5).
Some FanGraphs readers were curious if the declines were similar in nature, so I thought — both to serve and please — I would explore in greater detail.
As noted by Jeff Sullivan and others, framing declines like Lucroy’s are curious, since this a skill that generally is thought to age well. But Sullivan also argued, convincingly, back in December that framing was doomed from the start.
Wrote Jeff:
It doesn’t make too much sense that the best-receiving catchers would be getting worse. The other explanation would have to be that the average catcher is just improving.
So the value of framing was perhaps always in jeopardy. Still, the decline of these elite framers is striking — as is the variety of ways in which that decline is occurring.
Lucroy, who previously earned strikes on an above-average number of 50-50 calls at the lower part of the zone, now earns strikes at a lower-than-average rate in that area. Lucroy also appears not to be sitting as low in his crouch in recent years. Indeed, Ben Lindbergh found, via COMMANDf/x data, that Lucroy’s average glove height is higher.
But Molina and Posey are still getting calls in the lower part of the zone. They’re decline has taken other forms.
Consider Posey’s work in the lower part of the zone over the last three seasons…
| Season | Called Strikes | Balls | Strike % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 340 | 519 | 39.6 |
| 2016 | 440 | 642 | 40.6 |
| 2017 | 222 | 284 | 43.8 |
Those numbers actually appear to be increasing. Molina, for his part, has greatly improved this season, as well…
| Season | Called Strikes | Balls | Strike % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 364 | 689 | 34.5 |
| 2016 | 460 | 845 | 35.2 |
| 2017 | 388 | 340 | 53.3 |
But then consider their work at the north, east, and west sections of the borderline areas around the strike zone.
Posey and Molina have both been far less successful in earning borderline strikes up in the zone this season….
| Season | Called Strikes | Balls | Strike % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 121 | 196 | 38.2 |
| 2016 | 151 | 351 | 30.1 |
| 2017 | 65 | 196 | 24.9 |
| Season | Called Strikes | Balls | Strike % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 166 | 414 | 28.6 |
| 2016 | 246 | 527 | 31.8 |
| 2017 | 77 | 290 | 20.9 |
And they’ve also seen their framing rates erode at the edges of the zone, though they still catch more pitches there called as strikes compare to balls.
| Season | Called Strikes | Balls | Strike % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 843 | 400 | 67.8 |
| 2016 | 1009 | 504 | 66.7 |
| 2017 | 455 | 278 | 62.7 |
| Season | Called Strikes | Balls | Strike % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 843 | 400 | 67.8 |
| 2016 | 1009 | 504 | 66.7 |
| 2017 | 455 | 278 | 62.7 |
To present this information in a more friendly, digestible manner, consider some heat maps of their total frequency of receiving borderline pitches called as strikes.
Consider Posey’s frequency of strikes received in the borderline areas, according to Baseball Savant’s “detailed” zone, in 2016, when he was the game’s No. 1 framing catcher:

The following heat map is from the current season, and it’s evident that Posey has been less proficient to the north and east and west of the zone.

The visuals are similar for Molina, whose framing has gradually deteriorated north, east, and west:
First, here’s 2015:

And 2016:

And then 2017:

What’s interesting is that, halfway through 2017, there has been a five-percentage-point drop, league-wide, in called strike percentage in the borderline area at the top of the zone. The top of the zone is also a rarer place to get a called strike than in 2015.
In researching pitch-location data of that area at Baseball Savant, I found in 2015 there were 5,824 called strikes at the borderline area at the top of the zone compared to 17,626 balls (24.8% called-strike percentage). Last season, there were 6,666 called strikes league wide and 18,664 balls (26.3%) there. This season — through Wednesday — there have been 2,888 and 10,616 balls (21.3%).
And as for east and west border regions via Baseball Savant’s detailed zones, consider:
2015: 33,369 strikes, 16,016 balls (67.6% called strikes)
2016: 35,040 strikes, 17,632 balls (66.5%)
2017: 17,781 strikes, 9,023 balls (66.3%)
Interestingly, the zone is tightening up east, west, and north at a time when the commissioner has talked about raising the lower part of the zone, which has grown this season.
In the lower part of the region, the quantity of pitches received as called strikes has jumped dramatically to 44.3% (12,024 called strikes, 15128 balls) this season, according to Savant data. Consider that rate compared to the 35.0% mark in 2016 (17,291 called strikes, 32,002 balls) and in 2015, when the rate was 36.5% (17,105 called strikes, 29,745 balls). That seems to be a stunning change at the bottom of the zone, especially after the zone shrunk for the first time in the PITCHf/x era last season.
In analyzing Lucroy’s stance and glove height, in knowing his injury history, it seems plausible there are physical explanations behind his decline. And if Lucroy is losing skill in the lower part of the zone, when the zone is expanding there — when catchers as a whole are better framers — than perhaps that explains some of the dramatic change.
It’s possible Posey and Molina have lost athleticism, lost the requisite strength to stick certain pitches. But there isn’t an obvious difference to this author.
Posey getting some high strikes in 2015:
Posey not getting a high strike in 2017:
Here’s Molina getting a called strike in 2015:
And Molina failing to get a pitch caught in a similar location in 2017:
This is a small sample, of course. Perhaps there are subtle physical differences — differences that might be revealed by deeper dive into the video — but Molina and Posey don’t appear to have dramatically changed their setups, even if Lucroy has.
Baseball Prospectus’ framing model accounts for the quality of pitching a catcher receives, so Madison Bumgarner’s absence shouldn’t be explaining Posey’s decline. Perhaps part of it could be attributed to an evolving zone, perhaps their reputations have caught up to them (in regard to umpire bias), perhaps they are losing physical skills, perhaps their decline is also about the rise of catchers’ framing efficiency as a group. Perhaps there’s too much going on to explain these declines — declines which, while not as dramatic as Lucroy’s, might be more mysterious.
A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.
Great stuff as always travis. Any thoughts on reviewing brian mccann and Russell martin too. These 2 and molina are hof level depending on defensive evaluation, interested in what you have to say.
Umpire adjustment seems a factor. A skill based on “fooling” the ump seems vulnerable to the ump taking that into account with certain catchers.
Most definintely. Umpires review their ball/strike maps and adjust these days, so the catchers who have exploited these umps the most are going to see the largest declines.
Pitch framing is a fascinating topic for me, largely because it feels like we still have barely scratched the surface from an analysis perspective. There are just so many factors to consider, umpire called strikezone, pitcher repertoire, handedness, and command, stadium factors like quality of lighting at night and angle of the sun during day games, effect of the batter’s eye on the appearance of the pitch, ect.
It was interesting in 2013. It’s been beaten to death so thoroughly by BP et al. since then, that there really isn’t much left to dissect. I think it’s pretty clear we are headed to automated stike calls within the next 5-10 years anyway. Or at least I hope we are.
Both of Buster Posey’s “good” GIFs are in the 9th innings of CGSO performances, at a time when umpires are expected to call a generous strike zone. In both cases, he was set up on the same side of the plate as the high strike he framed. The “bad” GIF came during a game where the starter gave up 5 ER in 6 innings, and he was set up on the opposite side of the plate.
I’m not disputing the conclusion that his framing has declined, but I don’t think these examples are representative.
Nice catch. Would love to see comparable Leverage Index situation GIFs if someone was smarter and more diligent than I. (Or being paid to do it!)
MLB is not using automated strike callers. The same speculation made about a decline in someone’s skills can be made about the umpires making the calls.
There is also the real possibility of a shift in what is called a strike. I’ve noticed the check swing creeping back into existence in the past year and a half after being eliminated from the game as well.
Did you not see many check swings in 2015?
Is there a way to control for the individual variability of umpires and match the same umpire with the same catcher from past years to this year?
The obvious explanation here is that the umpires read articles on framing, see which catchers are ‘fooling’ them, and resolve that these catchers won’t fool them anymore. Why would any other explanation be necessary?
Honestly I’ve always been skeptical of these framing metrics. They seem very volatile and I’m not sure there’s a whole lot of signal in this noise. Certainly single-season or even half-season numbers are relatively useless
Careful. It’s become a cult religion for some people. The devout live for umpire errors and the factors that may or may not be behind them.
As others have mentioned. Surely good umpires can look at all the stats to see which catchers fool them and adjust for that in the game. If say Posey last year got 2 extra strikes per game (completely made up) then the umpire can consciously have 2 50:50 calls be balls to compensate for last years mistakes. This must be a good service the likes of Fangraphs and the other stat sites provide to help improve the umpiring in the game.
Not included in this terrific article is the fact that Yasmani Grandal is still a beast at framing pitches.
Hard to say Grandal isn’t a top defensive catcher this season.
What does the overall year-to-year scatterplot look like currently, versus for previous years?
Excellent question. I would love to see a past vs. presnet year-to-year correl. for catchers, excluding all pitchers they caught both seasons.
The league keeps similar data on all their umpires, I’m sure, but how much time has anyone spent trying to “reverse engineer” that data to find out if a catcher’s poor rating one year might be due to an unlucky string of umpires behind the dish? And might that also be a good way to find if there’s really noise in the static?
It seems that another factor in a catchers framing ability variation may be related to how close the pitch is to the intended target instead of how close to the the strike pitch is.
FYI, this article was discussed + summarized on-air during the Mets-Cardinals game on SNY today by Mets broadcaster Gary Cohen, when the subject of pitch-framing came up.