The Postseason Strike Zone Isn’t Any Better
There’s a fundamental truth about the playoffs that everyone knows, but that’s also easy to forget. That is, the playoffs are selective for the best. They’re selective for the best baseball teams, and as a part of that, they’re selective for the best baseball throwers and the best baseball hitters. Come playoff time, it doesn’t matter so much that, say, the Cubs trounced all their opponents, because in the playoffs, everyone is at least pretty good. The quality of competition evens things out. Lineups are disproportionately good, but so are pitching staffs, and it can feel almost like a whole month of partially-diluted All-Star Games.
October selects for the best on-field product. But what about the on-field umpires? We know that umpires have to earn their way to gaining postseason responsibilities. We know it’s considered an honor to be an ump in the playoffs, as it should be. You’d think it would follow that the playoff strike zone would reflect this selection on the part of the league. As I look at it, the October zone does appear slightly different. But not in the direction of being better. Rather, it seems a little more pitcher-friendly.
As I always try to make clear in posts like this: I’m not actually a good analyst. There are some really good strike-zone analysts out there, and I’m not one of them. I look for easy, simple solutions, and pray they’re not misleading. That’s what I’ve done here, using Baseball Savant. If you’ve ever used that tool, you know it allows you to select the designated PITCHf/x strike zone. I accepted that as my foundation, and I proceeded. Let’s just get right to it! I looked at data from 2008 through 2016, separating the regular season and the playoffs. First, here are the rates of in-zone strikes, over all in-zone called pitches.
On its own, that looks good, right? This is what we would want to see. The playoff line is consistently a little above the regular-season line, indicating that fewer deserved strikes have been missed in the playoffs. Over the window, the regular-season average is 88.0%. The postseason average is 89.2%. It’s small, but it’s meaningful, and so come playoff time, strikes are more often strikes. Good job, umpires! Now for the rates of out-of-zone strikes:
The trend is good — as you could see in the first plot, umpires have been getting better over time. But this doesn’t quite show what you’d want to see, necessarily. If there are more in-zone strikes, you’d also want to see fewer out-of-zone strikes. Yet here, the line for the postseason is again pretty consistently a little above the line for the regular season. Since 2008, the regular-season average is 14.6%. The postseason average is 15.1%. That’s a smaller gap than before, but, there are way more pitches taken out of the zone than within it. So why not put this information together? Here are the year-to-year “correct-call” rates, assuming, again, that we can trust the strike-zone coordinates:
The umpires have gotten better about the zone, as it’s been designated. What we actually know this to mean is that the strike zone has gotten considerably bigger during the PITCHf/x era, but that’s kind of because the strike zone itself is fairly large. That’s why there’s been talk about shrinking it. By the data on Baseball Savant, in 2008, 83.8% of calls in the regular season were correct. This past year, that was up at 87.6%. There’s been very steady improvement in that regard.
But look at the blue line against the green line. There’s effectively no separation. The regular-season average is 86.0%. The postseason average is 85.9%, yielding a negligible difference. Just this year, we’re looking at 87.6% against 87.4%. The strike zone in the playoffs hasn’t been meaningfully more correct. Though calls within the zone itself have been more accurate, those have been offset by a slight widening of the zone boundaries. Put another way, pitchers have found strikes in more places, and that’s presumably worked a little to their collective benefit.
I’m going to guess this isn’t actually too hard to explain. For one thing, playoff umpires aren’t only selected for their strike-zone accuracy. Not in the way that players are selected for their performance. But beyond that, we know that playoff pitchers are better, overall, and better pitchers tend to have better command. Pitchers with better command are far easier to receive, and pitchers who are easier to receive will get more of the benefit of the doubt. It’s possible, also, that the playoffs somewhat select for better receivers in the first place, but I think a lot of it is on the arms. In the playoffs, you see fewer Trevor Bauers, and more Corey Klubers. You still see some Bauers, but not nearly so often, and predictable pitchers are easier pitchers for catchers and umpires alike. A pitch just off the plate by Bauer probably looks a little less like a strike than a pitch just off the plate by Kyle Hendricks.
That doesn’t make anything *good*. It just is, assuming that’s an accurate explanation. And I’m not sure there’s much to be done about it, so long as baseball continues with its current system. Based on this preliminary analysis, the typical postseason strike zone favors the pitcher more than the regular-season equivalent. It’s so subtle you might never notice from home, but, add it onto the pile of factors that make hitting in the playoffs so incredibly hard.
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.



The ump in game 1 of the World Series was pretty bad – he gave Lester like 5 <20% strikes.
I hate to be a why did this get downvoted guy, but why did this get downvoted.
Maybe you didn’t notice that Kluber was getting the benefit of anything close high, low, or left of the plate?
I don’t really trust my eyes due to the centerfield camera offset and the preposterous Fox strike zone box, so I go by pitchf/x (and heat maps for percentages). Not perfect but better than Joe Buck’s feelings.
The ump actually had a really strong game calling Kluber (if you put stock in pitchf/x).
I think you could objectively say that a lot of Kluber’s close pitches were strikes, but “nobody” gets the paint called like that, normally.
I find it an interesting paradox that many who oppose robot umps use robot umps to confirm the marginally small wrongness of human umps, while ignoring that they have already ceded the objective authority of rightness to robot umps.
Does the postseason in fact select plate umps who are above median in their accuracy, like for that year or for their career?
Might the improvement in apparent umpire accuracy over time mostly really reflect better Pitchf/x quality? I assume the sensors have gotten more accurate over these years.
I assume that is a small part of it, but not the whole of it.
This is an interesting study, but smashing all of the games into one chart allows for the small amount of really bad umpiring to be glossed over by the majority that is decent. I’m more interested in identifying which umpires suck and getting them gone.
You’re probably onto something there. Comparing the regular season to the post season is somewhat unfair since there are a greater number of umpires officiating the regular season games (close to 100?), which is not the case with the post-season. From the Wild Card games, to the Division Series, to the League Championship, the number of umpires keeps getting lower. There are 6 in the World Series. Mistakes made by 100 umpires over 4860 games versus mistakes made by a much smaller number of umpires over a maximum of 33 games. So many factors to consider.
So, umpires are getting less than 9 out of every 10 calls correct?
I don’t feel that 80-something percent accuracy should ever be acceptable.
Robot umps, please.
http://www.closecallsports.com/2016/10/analyzing-strike-zone-analysis-not-so.html
Agree that it is probably due to better pitchers and better catcher framing. I don’t think that umpires are selected for the post-season based on their regular season accuracy at all, but Joe Rogele could better address that.
Why not compare just the postseason pitchers’ numbers to their regular season called strike rate?
The postseason is filled with flame throwers with nasty stuff that rely on swinging strikes. I remember an article that showed guys with more velo and or movement will get squeezed a little more by the umpires.
So if the postseason is selective for these kinds of pitchers somewhat than an identical called strike rate by the umpires might actually be a very good performance.
The playoffs do not select for quality of umpire….my evidence, Joe West is a playoff umpire.
Isn’t it more of a seniority thing vs. actually being a quality official?