Preview Matchup
Freeland vs. Pepiot
COL
8:10 PM
TB
Preview Matchup
Morton vs. Gausman
BAL
11:07 PM
TOR
Preview Matchup
Keller vs. Gillispie
PIT
11:10 PM
MIA
Preview Matchup
Houck vs. Leiter
BOS
12:05 AM
TEX
Preview Matchup
Megill vs. Brown
NYM
12:10 AM
HOU
Preview Matchup
Taillon vs. Kelly
CHC
1:40 AM
AZ
Preview Matchup
Springs vs. Castillo
ATH
1:40 AM
SEA
Preview Matchup
López vs. Cease
ATL
1:40 AM
SD
Preview Matchup
Flaherty vs. Yamamoto
DET
2:10 AM
LAD
<
>

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
▾
2020
▾
Min Pitches Called: 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
1 Narváez, Omar mil 981 6 53.7% 30.3% 53.1% 16.9% 66.5% 68.6% 44.8% 55.1% 40%
2 Vázquez, Christian bos 1261 4 51.1% 23.1% 52.1% 33.3% 69.1% 68.1% 24.3% 53.3% 26%
3 Grandal, Yasmani cws 1078 3 51.1% 27% 51.1% 18.4% 63.5% 68.4% 40.3% 57.8% 30.7%
4 Realmuto, J.T. phi 1009 3 52.2% 24.6% 36.8% 17.6% 76.5% 67% 47.1% 51.2% 30.3%
5 Molina, Yadier stl 1317 3 50.5% 13.8% 43% 12.5% 65.4% 73.5% 40.2% 61.6% 30%
6 Murphy, Sean oak 1385 3 50% 21.3% 42.6% 11.3% 68.3% 67.7% 26.5% 57.1% 25.5%
7 Nola, Austin sd 1470 2 52% 13.7% 39.4% 23.5% 59.9% 67.6% 35.1% 68.3% 41.7%
8 Vogt, Stephen ari 602 2 52.2% 38.7% 37.5% 26.7% 57.5% 68.8% 30.8% 61.4% 36.9%
9 Barnes, Austin la 942 2 52.9% 20.4% 45.6% 16.7% 57.8% 74.1% 38.8% 64.2% 42.9%
10 Jeffers, Ryan min 597 2 52.6% 21.2% 37.3% 9.5% 72.7% 63.3% 42.3% 58.8% 39.7%
11 Caratini, Victor chc 622 2 52.9% 16.2% 58.1% 36% 63.5% 65.4% 48.5% 57% 24.2%
12 Stallings, Jacob pit 1237 2 48.9% 13.3% 36.1% 25% 60% 66.5% 30.7% 61% 33.1%
13 Pérez, Roberto cle 871 2 51.7% 6.1% 50.4% 19.2% 67.4% 72.6% 31.1% 54.8% 32.1%
14 Barnhart, Tucker cin 1009 1 50.4% 18.6% 43.7% 19% 69.9% 67.4% 31.4% 62.8% 26.9%
15 Hedges, Austin cle 745 1 49.7% 22.2% 45.9% 26.2% 60.7% 67.7% 29.7% 55.2% 32.9%
16 Tromp, Chadwick sf 547 1 50.5% 18.6% 38.1% 17.4% 70.3% 61.5% 38.6% 57.3% 38.6%
17 Higashioka, Kyle nyy 461 1 50.5% 17.1% 33.3% 18.8% 80.3% 72% 30% 55.6% 30.8%
18 Castro, Jason sd 727 1 50.8% 30.6% 51% 14.3% 56.3% 69.2% 47.6% 55.9% 30.4%
19 d'Arnaud, Travis atl 1437 1 49.1% 17.5% 52.5% 31% 66.6% 65.8% 28.5% 48.8% 21.6%
20 Bemboom, Anthony ana 511 1 48.1% 32.6% 36% 11.5% 64.3% 67.9% 33.3% 49.1% 30.8%
21 Nottingham, Jacob mil 525 1 50.1% 14.3% 40.4% 26.3% 68.8% 68.2% 34% 56.5% 27.1%
22 Casali, Curt cin 733 1 50.5% 15.3% 43.8% 27.3% 64.5% 69.8% 36.4% 60.9% 32.7%
23 Ramos, Wilson nym 1145 1 45.1% 25% 57.1% 27% 66.2% 64.4% 22% 30.5% 16.8%
24 Flowers, Tyler atl 615 1 49.8% 22.4% 52.4% 39.3% 63.5% 68.4% 33.9% 55.2% 23.3%
25 Contreras, Willson chc 1097 1 51.3% 21% 49.6% 31.6% 64.6% 68.8% 39.2% 53.7% 28.7%
26 Kelly, Carson ari 1085 1 49.3% 20% 40.7% 23.3% 70.9% 64.1% 41.7% 52.7% 22.1%
27 McCann, James cws 819 1 51.4% 5% 35.9% 20.9% 62.8% 75.3% 38.1% 62% 31.3%
28 Mathis, Jeff tex 699 1 49.9% 22.2% 55% 21.3% 62.6% 68.3% 34.7% 53.4% 26.4%
29 Garneau, Dustin hou 441 1 48.3% 25% 42.5% 32% 79.2% 63.2% 45.2% 48.6% 10.5%
30 Stassi, Max ana 794 1 50.8% 15.4% 52.3% 26.3% 59.5% 72.9% 31.4% 58.6% 35.1%
31 Avila, Alex min 458 0 46.7% 23.3% 57.1% 21.7% 60.4% 62.2% 29.3% 51% 17%
32 Bart, Joey sf 857 0 49.7% 24% 37.6% 27.7% 63.2% 69.8% 40% 52% 38%
33 Heineman, Tyler sf 417 0 49.6% 7.4% 40.3% 29.2% 70.1% 63.2% 50% 57.3% 20%
34 Díaz, Elias col 461 0 47.3% 25.7% 31.9% 20% 77.9% 55.7% 36.6% 43.8% 20.5%
35 Garver, Mitch min 559 0 46.5% 14% 46.8% 18.5% 55.4% 58.4% 38.5% 54% 40.5%
36 Perez, Salvador kc 1015 0 48.9% 17.5% 45.8% 14.5% 76.8% 71% 35.7% 43.9% 26.1%
37 Odom, Joseph sea 472 0 44.3% 13.9% 54.5% 30% 55.3% 54.8% 15.6% 50% 32.8%
38 Cervelli, Francisco mia 447 0 48.3% 23.8% 43.8% 11.8% 69.2% 68.4% 26.7% 46.2% 15.4%
39 Butera, Drew col 448 0 46.9% 20.6% 37.8% 18.8% 70% 54.1% 42.3% 59.8% 16.9%
40 McGuire, Reese tor 365 0 47.7% 18.2% 51.1% 21.1% 55.7% 63.9% 33.3% 51.4% 30.6%
41 Knapp, Andrew phi 612 0 45.4% 18.4% 43.3% 18.8% 60.7% 52.1% 41.2% 52.5% 25%
42 Murphy, John Ryan pit 545 0 50.6% 12.2% 39% 16.7% 67.3% 67.7% 26.1% 62.5% 38.9%
43 León, Sandy cle 661 0 49.9% 15.1% 53% 26.5% 59.5% 67.7% 48.6% 60.8% 24%
44 Wallach, Chad mia 530 0 46.8% 17.5% 44.7% 20% 65.9% 60.9% 29.3% 55.4% 28.1%
45 Trevino, Jose tex 590 0 49.2% 19% 48.2% 29.6% 68.7% 57.7% 50.9% 53.2% 24.6%
46 Romine, Austin det 1083 -1 45.8% 11.3% 32% 20.5% 61.2% 67.4% 31.6% 47.7% 30.7%
47 Jansen, Danny tor 1293 -1 46.5% 18.8% 38.7% 20.8% 65.2% 68% 26.6% 45.7% 32.3%
48 Greiner, Grayson det 489 -1 46.2% 34.2% 68.3% 24% 54.3% 61% 25% 41.2% 8.3%
49 Gallagher, Cam kc 549 -1 49.7% 15.2% 41.4% 9.5% 68.5% 57.6% 40% 68.1% 25%
50 Chirinos, Robinson nym 794 -1 46.7% 22.6% 40.2% 20.8% 64.2% 70.2% 38.1% 39.4% 29.4%
51 Wolters, Tony col 1016 -1 47.5% 21.3% 47.2% 22.9% 64.6% 65.8% 40.5% 47.3% 15.6%
52 Maldonado, Martín hou 1879 -1 48% 20.8% 46.7% 22.2% 64.3% 68.9% 26.3% 54.3% 22.1%
53 Torrens, Luis sea 625 -2 46.2% 20% 46.9% 21.9% 63.6% 57% 37.5% 50.4% 18.6%
54 Gomes, Yan was 908 -2 44.9% 21.3% 36.3% 18.4% 67.5% 61.5% 39.3% 45.5% 16.5%
55 Sánchez, Gary nyy 1170 -2 47.7% 12.8% 31.6% 12.8% 64.7% 69.3% 24.1% 52.2% 43.1%
56 Pérez, Michael tb 744 -2 46.8% 18.2% 63.9% 26.3% 64.1% 57.7% 19.6% 45.9% 19.7%
57 Sisco, Chance bal 703 -2 46.2% 18.8% 31% 14.3% 68.5% 58% 32.7% 48.9% 21.8%
58 Plawecki, Kevin bos 605 -3 43.1% 18.2% 50% 15.6% 62.6% 59.2% 31.6% 41.6% 18.6%
59 Alfaro, Jorge mia 756 -3 41.5% 14.5% 47.8% 18.6% 57.8% 56.4% 22% 44.4% 16.7%
60 Suzuki, Kurt was 889 -3 44.1% 22.2% 32.6% 12.1% 64.9% 63.9% 35.6% 43.8% 18%
61 Severino, Pedro bal 1007 -4 45.7% 24.6% 38.6% 15.9% 64.3% 64.7% 33.8% 45.1% 28.3%
62 Smith, Will la 1144 -5 43.9% 13.3% 50.4% 23.3% 62.6% 62.4% 33% 45.8% 22.6%
63 Zunino, Mike tb 1308 -5 45.6% 17.1% 49% 26.4% 59.6% 66.4% 23.8% 45.3% 20.1%