Catcher framing is the art of a catcher receiving a pitch in a way that makes it more likely for an umpire to call it a strike. This page breaks down the catcher’s view into eight zones around the strike zone and shows the called strike percentage of all non-swings in that zone. Strike Rate shows the cumulative total of all zones. Catcher Framing Runs converts strikes to runs saved on a .125 run/strike basis, and includes park and pitcher adjustments. To qualify, a catcher must receive 6 called pitches per team game.
How to say it: “In 2018, Jeff Mathis converted 55 percent of non-swing pitches into called strikes in the Shadow Zone, the best rate of any catcher in baseball.”
Qualifier: For catchers 6 called pitches (i.e., takes, or non-swings) in the ‘shadow zone’ per team game. For pitchers and batters 1.5 called pitches in the ‘shadow zone’ per team game. (The shadow zone is essentially the edges of the strike zone, roughly one ball width inside and one ball wide outside of the zone. See what that looks like here.)
For pitchers/batters: This shows the framing that occurred behind the plate while the player in question was pitching or hitting.
View: Catcher
▾
Team
▾
2024
▾
Min Called Pitches: (Q)
▾


Rk. Catcher Team Pitches
Catcher
Framing
Runs
Strike
Rate
 Zone 11
 Zone 12
 Zone 13
 Zone 14
 Zone 16
 Zone 17
 Zone 18
 Zone 19
Bailey, Patrick sf 2513 16 52.9% 26.8% 54.6% 30.8% 61.4% 66.5% 37.2% 59.3% 31.8%
Hedges, Austin tex 2025 13 52.5% 27.6% 58.3% 42.2% 53.8% 70% 38.8% 60.7% 26.5%
Heim, Jonah tex 3657 10 48.5% 20.1% 49.3% 28% 63.5% 69.2% 27.5% 46.9% 24.4%
Alvarez, Francisco nym 3006 9 48.9% 20.5% 49.1% 28.7% 67.2% 64.2% 35.8% 52.7% 26.1%
Murphy, Sean atl 2913 7 48.9% 18.3% 44.3% 21.8% 59.5% 62.5% 34.1% 62.5% 24.1%
Higashioka, Kyle nyy 2078 7 48.7% 12.7% 41.4% 26% 58.2% 65.8% 32.3% 63.8% 30%
Contreras, William mil 3310 7 48% 15.1% 50.1% 23.8% 58.1% 65.1% 32.4% 56.2% 26%
Raleigh, Cal sea 3257 6 47.5% 22.4% 50.2% 23% 64.1% 64% 34.6% 46.7% 20.4%
Trevino, Jose nyy 1450 6 49.9% 20.2% 49% 19% 65% 65.8% 43.5% 56.5% 22.9%
Caratini, Victor mil 1686 6 47.7% 22.5% 54.8% 23.3% 58.7% 66.7% 26.2% 51.4% 24.6%
Kirk, Alejandro tor 2595 5 49.2% 17% 48% 9.5% 63.9% 61.9% 40.3% 58.6% 24.5%
Gallagher, Cam cle 1430 5 51.2% 22.2% 49.5% 26.1% 65.9% 65.1% 40% 53.1% 28.9%
Rogers, Jake det 2751 5 48.7% 19.3% 41.9% 20.6% 56.6% 65.5% 36.8% 60.8% 23.8%
Rutschman, Adley bal 3064 5 48.3% 22.2% 60.3% 28.1% 69.7% 61.8% 29.6% 42.1% 21%
Zavala, Seby ari 1669 5 49.9% 15.7% 53.3% 29% 69.2% 66.1% 40.9% 50.8% 24.6%
Delay, Jason pit 1669 4 48.2% 18.6% 48.6% 28.4% 51.3% 69.6% 29% 59.1% 25.3%
Grandal, Yasmani cws 2369 4 47.4% 18.9% 55.4% 35.1% 56.2% 68.9% 26.5% 48.3% 21.6%
d'Arnaud, Travis atl 1857 4 48.4% 21.4% 49.8% 17.9% 61.5% 63% 33.1% 54.1% 23.1%
Fortes, Nick mia 2662 3 47.4% 18.4% 46.6% 13.8% 59.9% 62.3% 32.7% 56.7% 26.3%
Wynns, Austin col 1346 3 47.5% 20.2% 57.1% 38.2% 59.3% 63.8% 30.2% 44% 17.4%
Naylor, Bo cle 1756 3 47.2% 22.5% 51.6% 25.5% 63.8% 66.4% 26.5% 43.5% 25.8%
Barnhart, Tucker chc 975 3 49.7% 24.1% 53.2% 26.1% 62.3% 66% 32.6% 54.3% 21.1%
Vázquez, Christian min 2474 3 47.9% 17.3% 47.1% 29.3% 60.4% 66.5% 35% 53.6% 25.6%
Bart, Joey sf 763 2 52.2% 13.7% 56.4% 19.5% 58.5% 67.8% 30.9% 67.4% 27.7%
Amaya, Miguel chc 985 2 50.3% 27.9% 53% 13.9% 57.6% 64.8% 44.7% 54.7% 28.6%
Pinto, René tb 844 2 50% 25.4% 59.5% 36.4% 56.4% 71.1% 34.8% 50.3% 22.2%
Jansen, Danny tor 1854 2 47.7% 20.3% 53.7% 19.1% 69% 57.3% 35.3% 49.4% 20.5%
Sánchez, Gary sd 1842 2 48.4% 17.9% 52.5% 27.6% 56.7% 64.7% 30.6% 54% 27.7%
Sabol, Blake sf 1341 1 49% 20.2% 49% 27.7% 56.9% 74.7% 31.7% 50.9% 22.8%
Zunino, Mike cle 1070 1 47.2% 26.2% 47.3% 18.6% 68.4% 56.1% 33.9% 52.9% 20.3%
Rortvedt, Ben nyy 601 1 49.9% 12.5% 50% 37.5% 47.4% 74.8% 23.1% 58.8% 29.9%
Fermin, Freddy kc 1660 1 47.6% 12.9% 47.9% 19% 60.1% 60.2% 43.1% 53.1% 27.4%
McGuire, Reese bos 1409 1 48.1% 23.8% 57.6% 29% 63% 62.9% 34.8% 50.4% 17%
Barnes, Austin la 1456 1 47.8% 9.7% 45.3% 16.4% 51.5% 74% 27% 54.2% 34.5%
Nido, Tomás nym 538 1 47.2% 16% 46.6% 19% 64.6% 70% 10.5% 50% 26.9%
Narváez, Omar nym 1187 1 45.3% 20.5% 46.2% 26.4% 63.2% 59.2% 26.3% 47.6% 21%
Garver, Mitch tex 729 0 46.2% 20.8% 47.8% 7.7% 63% 57.1% 42% 48.6% 19.5%
Wells, Austin nyy 535 0 47.5% 23.1% 49.3% 10.3% 64% 63.6% 23.5% 52% 37.5%
McCann, James bal 1551 0 46.9% 21.4% 50% 29.2% 65.5% 58.7% 27.3% 52% 18.3%
Wallach, Chad ana 1282 0 46.3% 19.8% 42.3% 14.1% 60.4% 66.8% 36.8% 48.1% 29%
Rodríguez, Endy pit 1380 0 46.8% 13.9% 54.4% 22% 62.6% 58.9% 37.2% 50% 22.5%
Lee, Korey cws 680 -1 46.6% 33.3% 56.3% 17.9% 58.9% 61.8% 38.5% 48.9% 17.2%
Moreno, Gabriel ari 3219 -1 45.6% 15% 38.1% 14.2% 57.8% 57.9% 33.2% 56.5% 26.5%
Thaiss, Matt ana 1987 -1 46.4% 23.6% 48% 20% 54.7% 68.5% 22.6% 51.7% 25%
Kelly, Carson det 1212 -1 45.9% 10.8% 54.9% 20% 59.3% 59% 35.2% 50.5% 13.6%
Casali, Curt cin 808 -1 44.3% 13.3% 61.7% 11.4% 55.7% 52.3% 27.8% 51.3% 20.3%
Smith, Will la 3143 -2 44.9% 13.4% 45.1% 21.2% 55.1% 65.1% 27.1% 55.9% 20.2%
Maile, Luke cin 1738 -2 42.3% 12.1% 56.4% 26.8% 54.6% 63.9% 20.4% 38.8% 13.5%
Bethancourt, Christian tb 2505 -2 47% 25.5% 51.9% 26.7% 66.7% 57.4% 27.9% 51.7% 18.1%
Haase, Eric cle 1706 -2 46.3% 9.3% 42% 18.6% 59.7% 62.6% 30.4% 57.2% 25.1%
Sullivan, Brett sd 764 -2 43.7% 5.9% 42.9% 19.4% 60.8% 60.4% 9.1% 46.2% 35.4%
Campusano, Luis sd 1125 -2 45.1% 15.3% 39.9% 26.8% 49.5% 73.5% 20.9% 51.8% 29.1%
Pérez, Carlos oak 958 -3 40% 18.7% 47.8% 31.8% 52.3% 59.9% 21.6% 35.1% 7.9%
Nola, Austin sd 1333 -3 43.1% 15.1% 50.5% 23.1% 55.3% 60.7% 23.2% 47.1% 20.7%
Gomes, Yan chc 2745 -3 44.1% 25.3% 50.7% 18.7% 59.1% 60.7% 29.8% 42.7% 19.5%
Murphy, Tom sea 1016 -3 42.8% 13.1% 42.1% 25% 59.7% 51.6% 38.8% 49.4% 15.8%
Stubbs, Garrett phi 966 -3 42.9% 20.6% 42.3% 27.1% 46.4% 54.9% 31% 54.8% 19.1%
Jeffers, Ryan min 2216 -4 44.3% 23.7% 55% 19.8% 59.2% 55.6% 30.3% 43.5% 17.1%
Knizner, Andrew stl 2064 -4 44% 19.6% 59.8% 34.2% 60.7% 61.2% 25.2% 34.4% 12.8%
Mejía, Francisco tb 1262 -4 43.5% 9% 49.7% 20% 58.7% 54.9% 25.2% 50.3% 26.7%
Herrera, Jose ari 1228 -4 41.7% 20.5% 45.8% 30.9% 50.2% 64.6% 22.8% 40% 16.2%
Adams, Riley was 1209 -5 42.7% 18.3% 43.2% 23.1% 59.5% 64.4% 27.6% 43.7% 14.9%
Wong, Connor bos 3073 -5 44% 12.5% 41.6% 26.7% 50.7% 69.7% 24.1% 48.5% 18.6%
Contreras, Willson stl 2765 -5 44.3% 21.3% 50.4% 25.9% 59.8% 59.9% 26.4% 40.2% 18.5%
Stallings, Jacob mia 2123 -5 44.1% 16.4% 44.9% 21.1% 55.1% 67.9% 32% 46% 18.1%
Diaz, Yainer hou 1339 -5 42% 16.4% 44.8% 20.3% 55.2% 62.6% 34.8% 44.5% 17.4%
O'Hoppe, Logan ana 1458 -5 41.9% 21.4% 45.7% 12.9% 62.7% 50.5% 28.7% 47.1% 14.7%
Perez, Salvador kc 2469 -7 43.9% 16.3% 48% 15.4% 60.2% 60.3% 29.2% 46.4% 20%
Langeliers, Shea oak 3642 -8 44% 14.9% 44% 19.2% 49.4% 66.8% 27.1% 47.9% 25.1%
Díaz, Elias col 3530 -8 43.2% 24.7% 61.2% 26.2% 63.4% 48.3% 28.2% 35.4% 11.9%
Stephenson, Tyler cin 2436 -9 42% 27.2% 59.5% 33.3% 55.3% 51.5% 25% 35.8% 11.5%
Ruiz, Keibert was 3676 -13 42.6% 23.1% 53.1% 24.4% 58.1% 58.7% 19.6% 39.6% 17.1%
Realmuto, J.T. phi 4192 -14 43.9% 11.9% 48.2% 13.9% 61.8% 56.3% 31.3% 46% 20.5%
Maldonado, Martín hou 3421 -17 41% 25.4% 46.9% 22.8% 53.5% 57.1% 21.9% 40.7% 15.1%