Preview Matchup
Gausman vs. Fried
TOR
5:05 PM
NYY
Preview Matchup
Houck vs. Lively
BOS
5:10 PM
CLE
Preview Matchup
Buehler vs. Nikhazy
BOS
10:10 PM
CLE
Preview Matchup
Young vs. Mize
BAL
5:10 PM
DET
Preview Matchup
Morton vs. TBA
BAL
10:10 PM
DET
Preview Matchup
Kikuchi vs. Woods Richardson
LAA
6:10 PM
MIN
Preview Matchup
Priester vs. Gray
MIL
6:15 PM
STL
Preview Matchup
Greene vs. Senzatela
CIN
7:10 PM
COL
Preview Matchup
Holmes vs. Lord
NYM
8:05 PM
WSH
Preview Matchup
Mahle vs. Ray
TEX
8:05 PM
SF
Preview Matchup
Luzardo vs. Brown
PHI
8:05 PM
CHC
Preview Matchup
Cannon vs. Springs
CWS
8:05 PM
ATH
Preview Matchup
Valdez vs. Wacha
HOU
11:10 PM
KC
Preview Matchup
Holmes vs. Kelly
ATL
12:10 AM
AZ
Preview Matchup
Pepiot vs. Cease
TB
12:40 AM
SD
Preview Matchup
Keller vs. Sasaki
PIT
1:10 AM
LAD
Preview Matchup
Gillispie vs. Castillo
MIA
1:40 AM
SEA
<
>

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
▾
2019
▾
Min Called Pitches: 500
▾


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
1 Hedges, Austin sd 2,682 16 53.9% 23.3% 47.8% 23.4% 64.2% 68.2% 44.1% 61.9% 39.9%
2 Flowers, Tyler atl 2,251 15 53% 22.6% 54% 11.8% 64.9% 68.3% 35.1% 62.4% 35.4%
3 Grandal, Yasmani mil 3,703 13 51% 19.5% 51.8% 31.7% 58.4% 72.5% 32.6% 55.7% 31.2%
4 Pérez, Roberto cle 3,032 12 51.8% 16.4% 47.9% 23.4% 65.8% 71.4% 42.2% 56% 32.3%
5 Vázquez, Christian bos 3,250 12 51.2% 24.6% 55.3% 28% 65.7% 71% 30.8% 47.2% 28%
6 McCann, Brian atl 2,265 9 49.8% 23.4% 41.8% 16% 74.4% 64.3% 42.3% 48.7% 24.5%
7 Realmuto, J.T. phi 3,727 8 50.4% 21% 38.4% 23.7% 74.7% 63.3% 40% 51% 27.1%
8 Stassi, Max ana 1,203 7 53.6% 19.8% 43.3% 19.3% 65.4% 77.5% 31.5% 59% 38.3%
9 Posey, Buster sf 2,673 7 51.4% 27.4% 46.3% 14.5% 74.2% 67.5% 35.9% 50% 24.6%
10 Martin, Russell la 1,490 6 53.2% 24.6% 53.6% 22.2% 70.2% 75.2% 36.3% 49.8% 28%
11 Kelly, Carson ari 2,587 5 52.3% 22.2% 45.1% 18.1% 69.6% 68.2% 38.6% 54.5% 37.1%
12 Jansen, Danny tor 2,831 4 50.3% 23.1% 47.2% 22.2% 70.5% 64.8% 40.1% 54% 26.8%
13 Stallings, Jacob pit 1,387 4 50.5% 18.1% 38.8% 10.9% 65.2% 68% 44.7% 52.3% 37%
14 Avila, Alex ari 1,403 4 52.5% 14.1% 50.4% 20% 69.8% 68.2% 37.6% 55.8% 32.5%
15 Piña, Manny mil 1,184 4 52.1% 20.3% 50% 17% 61.2% 72.8% 49.4% 57% 30.9%
16 Plawecki, Kevin cle 1,279 4 53.6% 20.9% 45.4% 21.5% 63.9% 79.7% 30.9% 53.8% 27%
17 Murphy, Tom sea 1,972 4 50.5% 14.6% 38.9% 12.2% 57.3% 66.4% 40.6% 64.5% 35.1%
18 León, Sandy bos 1,570 3 51.8% 28.9% 63.1% 23.9% 68.2% 67.8% 24.7% 44.6% 17.5%
19 Caratini, Victor chc 1,346 2 51% 28% 41.4% 21.5% 62.1% 74.1% 42.2% 53.8% 29.5%
20 Barnhart, Tucker cin 2,359 2 49% 10.6% 45.5% 23.7% 61.9% 68.9% 30.8% 58.2% 28.8%
21 Bemboom, Anthony ana 511 2 50.1% 6.5% 42.6% 17.9% 53.2% 82.4% 22% 58.1% 45.8%
22 Castro, Jason min 2,067 2 49.9% 17% 43.7% 20.5% 65.5% 68.7% 33.1% 51.9% 32.1%
23 Knapp, Andrew phi 973 2 51.7% 34.5% 62.3% 29.4% 72.7% 57.8% 34.2% 47.6% 25.3%
24 Nido, Tomás nym 1,011 2 50.5% 16.7% 43.3% 22% 59.8% 77.5% 25.8% 48.4% 39.8%
25 Smith, Will la 1,317 2 50.5% 29.5% 55% 18% 68.4% 66.3% 26.9% 48.6% 31.2%
26 Barnes, Austin la 1,560 1 51.6% 14.9% 36.2% 16.7% 61.5% 69.7% 36% 63.1% 45.4%
27 Gomes, Yan was 2,811 1 47.7% 21.8% 38.1% 18.8% 70.5% 60.6% 37% 50.7% 18.7%
28 Gallagher, Cam kc 1,127 1 48.7% 18.1% 30.4% 14% 72.1% 56.4% 55.8% 52.4% 24.8%
29 Garneau, Dustin oak 813 1 47.8% 4.3% 46.8% 14.6% 65.8% 63.7% 28.8% 53.4% 30.3%
30 Molina, Yadier stl 3,362 1 48.8% 27% 59.8% 25.6% 66.5% 67.8% 30.6% 43.1% 19.7%
31 Greiner, Grayson det 1,629 1 47.6% 25.8% 40.1% 20.7% 64.2% 68.8% 30.5% 49.8% 19.6%
32 Wynns, Austin bal 635 0 47.4% 29.3% 46% 13.9% 66.9% 72.6% 20% 45.2% 20%
33 Trevino, Jose tex 1,034 0 47.7% 25.3% 56.5% 23.7% 70.9% 63% 26.1% 41.5% 13.1%
34 McGuire, Reese tor 728 0 50.7% 13.7% 47.1% 21.1% 61.6% 71.8% 33.9% 65.3% 24.7%
35 Federowicz, Tim tex 729 0 50.5% 27.1% 55.8% 22.2% 75.8% 63.7% 35.8% 45.3% 16.9%
36 Casali, Curt cin 1,636 0 48.7% 7.5% 50.6% 22.2% 65.7% 67% 32.1% 50.7% 25.2%
37 Romine, Austin nyy 1,846 0 48.7% 22.8% 46.2% 25.3% 71.1% 62.4% 37.9% 46.6% 21.3%
38 Hundley, Nick oak 681 -1 44.3% 24.1% 52.1% 24.2% 67.8% 66% 28.9% 33.3% 14%
39 Rogers, Jake det 1,058 -1 47.6% 12.9% 46.1% 10.2% 64% 64.3% 24.1% 56.2% 27.7%
40 Herrmann, Chris oak 632 -1 47.9% 16.3% 53.9% 17.1% 61.9% 66.7% 37.3% 50.4% 25%
41 Cervelli, Francisco atl 1,021 -1 47.4% 26.9% 43.9% 10.8% 67.2% 60.1% 40% 47.7% 23%
42 Maldonado, Martín hou 3,010 -1 48.2% 19% 43.5% 21.4% 62.5% 70.5% 25.3% 50.1% 28.4%
43 d'Arnaud, Travis tb 2,226 -2 48.8% 21.9% 56.8% 27.6% 62.7% 62.9% 27% 50.6% 25.4%
44 Mathis, Jeff tex 2,230 -2 47.7% 11.5% 37.7% 12.7% 59.2% 72% 30.8% 52.7% 31.7%
45 Dini, Nick kc 512 -2 42.6% 8.1% 28.6% 10.5% 54.8% 61.5% 40% 45.5% 35.5%
46 Zunino, Mike tb 2,020 -2 49.4% 21.9% 54.9% 24.5% 64.6% 69.4% 29.5% 53% 21.1%
47 Iannetta, Chris col 1,240 -2 46.7% 23.4% 53.4% 30.2% 74.8% 60.6% 35.4% 33.6% 24.1%
48 Vogt, Stephen sf 1,406 -3 45.4% 15.5% 31.1% 22.2% 64.8% 63.5% 31.7% 50.2% 28.2%
49 Maile, Luke tor 1,156 -3 46.8% 18.1% 47.4% 27.7% 61% 66% 41.3% 51.2% 21.4%
50 Ramos, Wilson nym 3,507 -3 46.8% 25.7% 58.8% 35.2% 63.3% 67.5% 22% 32.8% 16%
51 Hicks, John det 1,711 -3 46.8% 20.8% 40.8% 26.2% 65.6% 65.9% 32.9% 45.2% 20.9%
52 Holaday, Bryan mia 999 -3 43.7% 18.1% 36.7% 14.6% 58.3% 67.2% 33.8% 41.7% 22.5%
53 Lucroy, Jonathan chc 2,271 -3 47.2% 12.1% 39.4% 18.8% 62.9% 68.3% 24.5% 50.1% 30.4%
54 Viloria, Meibrys kc 1,222 -4 45.1% 22.1% 35.8% 25.4% 58.2% 67.6% 29.9% 48.5% 20.2%
55 Mejía, Francisco sd 1,539 -4 47.3% 16.5% 36.5% 14% 61.9% 70.1% 33.3% 55.4% 28.7%
56 Garver, Mitch min 2,205 -4 48.6% 13.4% 43.3% 13.6% 62.7% 63.9% 36.8% 58.4% 31%
57 Contreras, Willson chc 2,874 -4 48.4% 22.9% 46.6% 21.6% 62.7% 70.1% 30.8% 47.6% 21.1%
58 Phegley, Josh oak 2,663 -5 45.9% 18.8% 44% 18.8% 67.2% 59.6% 28.3% 43.8% 26.4%
59 Suzuki, Kurt was 2,267 -5 46.7% 29.7% 46.2% 23.2% 67.6% 60.5% 33.5% 44.3% 18.1%
60 Sisco, Chance bal 1,369 -5 44.3% 14.4% 40.4% 18.5% 67.1% 59.5% 34.3% 44.1% 18.5%
61 Severino, Pedro bal 2,520 -5 46.2% 19.9% 43.3% 20.3% 63.7% 61.4% 32.1% 48.4% 22.6%
62 Sánchez, Gary nyy 2,821 -6 46.9% 24.9% 44.4% 24.1% 64.6% 68.1% 22.9% 42.2% 29.5%
63 Narváez, Omar sea 2,824 -6 46.7% 19.6% 42.7% 30.6% 58.8% 64.7% 33.2% 45.8% 27.3%
64 Wieters, Matt stl 1,224 -6 43.2% 15.1% 49.1% 16.7% 68.8% 54.7% 26.2% 40.9% 19.1%
65 Kiner-Falefa, Isiah tex 1,107 -6 42.6% 19.4% 37.6% 10.9% 65.3% 53.4% 20.3% 46.8% 20.8%
66 Alfaro, Jorge mia 3,156 -6 47.4% 28.2% 48.3% 21.6% 66.1% 59.7% 35.8% 49.1% 19.6%
67 Smith, Kevan ana 1,482 -7 42.8% 16.2% 52.1% 20% 64.1% 65% 16.8% 38.2% 15.6%
68 Wolters, Tony col 3,050 -7 46% 15.7% 46.3% 16.4% 63.6% 65.9% 31.8% 46.9% 22.3%
69 Castillo, Welington cws 1,397 -8 42.7% 9.2% 52.5% 16.9% 57.8% 65.4% 31.5% 38.3% 25%
70 Díaz, Elias pit 2,545 -9 44.7% 20% 46.7% 24.8% 63.7% 61.7% 33.7% 38.7% 20%
71 Chirinos, Robinson hou 3,448 -10 47.9% 18.6% 44.3% 14.7% 64.5% 65.5% 38.5% 50.7% 23.5%
72 McCann, James cws 2,991 -15 44.9% 22.2% 51.1% 26.6% 65.8% 63.4% 20.1% 44% 13.9%