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.


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
Narváez, Omar mil 967 5 53.6% 30.3% 53.1% 17.2% 65.9% 68.7% 44.7% 54.6% 40.3%
Realmuto, J.T. phi 978 3 51.9% 24.2% 36.6% 17.6% 76.4% 67% 48.2% 50.8% 28.4%
Molina, Yadier stl 1279 3 50.4% 14.3% 43.6% 11.4% 65.4% 73.9% 38.1% 61.1% 29.9%
Grandal, Yasmani cws 1071 3 51.1% 27.4% 51.1% 18.4% 63.5% 68.4% 39.5% 57.6% 30.1%
Vázquez, Christian bos 1238 3 50.9% 22.9% 51.6% 32.3% 68.8% 67.5% 24.6% 53.3% 25.4%
Murphy, Sean oak 1355 3 49.5% 21.3% 42.9% 10.1% 67.9% 67.3% 26.6% 56.7% 24.4%
Barnes, Austin la 935 2 52.6% 20.8% 45.2% 16.7% 57.5% 73.8% 38% 64% 42.9%
Pérez, Roberto cle 861 2 51.2% 6.3% 50% 19.2% 67.1% 72.1% 31.1% 53.9% 32.1%
Caratini, Victor chc 610 2 53% 16.2% 59.5% 33.3% 63.1% 66.2% 48.5% 57.1% 24.2%
Stallings, Jacob pit 1225 2 48.8% 13.3% 36.8% 23.7% 60.1% 66.2% 29.9% 60.7% 33.3%
Contreras, Willson chc 1079 2 51.3% 21.7% 50.5% 31.6% 65.5% 68.4% 39.2% 53.1% 28.1%
Bemboom, Anthony ana 500 2 48.4% 30% 36.7% 12.5% 64.9% 67.1% 33.3% 50% 30.8%
McCann, James cws 812 2 51.6% 5% 35.9% 22.5% 63.1% 75.5% 38.1% 62% 31.3%
Mathis, Jeff tex 688 1 49.6% 22.2% 54.5% 21.7% 62.2% 68.3% 33.3% 52.6% 25.7%
Casali, Curt cin 721 1 50.3% 15.3% 43.6% 25.6% 65% 69.2% 37.5% 60.9% 33%
Nottingham, Jacob mil 500 1 49.8% 15.2% 42.2% 26.3% 67.3% 67.9% 35.3% 56.4% 26.3%
Jeffers, Ryan min 582 1 51.9% 21.9% 35.7% 9.5% 72% 62.5% 41.2% 58.2% 38.7%
Barnhart, Tucker cin 993 1 50.4% 18.6% 43.6% 18.4% 69.9% 67.4% 31.4% 62.8% 26.6%
Nola, Austin sd 1440 1 51.7% 13.9% 39.3% 23.8% 59.7% 67.5% 34.6% 68% 40.4%
Kelly, Carson ari 1061 1 49.6% 20.7% 41.4% 23.3% 71.4% 64.5% 40% 52.7% 22.2%
Flowers, Tyler atl 598 1 49.2% 22.4% 51.6% 34.6% 63% 68.1% 33.3% 54.9% 21.7%
Tromp, Chadwick sf 538 1 50.2% 19% 37.1% 17.4% 69.8% 62.8% 38.6% 56.4% 37.2%
Stassi, Max ana 782 1 50.5% 15.6% 51.2% 27% 59.2% 73% 31.4% 58.2% 35.1%
Higashioka, Kyle nyy 456 1 50.4% 17.1% 32.1% 18.8% 81.3% 71.7% 30% 55.6% 31.4%
d'Arnaud, Travis atl 1410 1 49.2% 18.2% 52.8% 30.6% 66.6% 65.4% 29.2% 49% 21%
Vogt, Stephen ari 600 1 52% 38.7% 37.5% 26.7% 57.1% 68.8% 30.8% 61.4% 35.9%
Garneau, Dustin hou 427 1 48% 25% 41.5% 30.4% 78.6% 63.5% 44.8% 48.6% 10.8%
Castro, Jason sd 717 0 50.3% 30% 50.5% 14.3% 56.4% 68.6% 47.6% 55.2% 30.4%
León, Sandy cle 651 0 49.9% 15.4% 53% 27.1% 59.5% 67.2% 47.2% 60.7% 24.7%
Ramos, Wilson nym 1114 0 44.8% 25% 58.6% 27.4% 66.2% 63.8% 22.4% 29.6% 15.7%
Perez, Salvador kc 996 0 48.9% 17.9% 45.3% 14.5% 76.2% 71.8% 36.8% 43.5% 26.4%
Butera, Drew col 439 0 46.9% 20.6% 40.5% 18.8% 69.7% 53.6% 44% 58.8% 17.2%
Garver, Mitch min 558 0 46.4% 14% 46.8% 18.5% 55% 58.4% 38.5% 54% 40.5%
Hedges, Austin cle 736 0 49.5% 21.2% 45.9% 25% 60% 68.2% 29.7% 54.8% 32.9%
Cervelli, Francisco mia 439 0 48.1% 23.8% 42.6% 6.3% 70.1% 67.4% 27.6% 46.6% 15.4%
Murphy, John Ryan pit 532 0 50.6% 12.2% 39% 16.7% 67.3% 68.1% 25% 62.2% 40.4%
Bart, Joey sf 841 0 49.3% 24% 38% 27.7% 62.5% 69.1% 40.4% 51.6% 37.7%
Trevino, Jose tex 568 0 49.1% 19% 48.8% 28% 68.8% 58.9% 51.9% 53.3% 22%
Heineman, Tyler sf 408 0 50% 7.4% 41% 30.4% 71.2% 63.8% 46.7% 57.3% 18.8%
Avila, Alex min 454 0 46.9% 23.3% 56.3% 21.7% 60.4% 63% 29.3% 51.5% 17.4%
Díaz, Elias col 451 0 47.2% 23.5% 31.9% 21.4% 77.5% 56% 36.6% 44.2% 20.9%
Knapp, Andrew phi 603 -1 44.9% 18.4% 42.4% 18.8% 60.2% 52.5% 41.2% 51.3% 25%
Jansen, Danny tor 1280 -1 46.3% 18.2% 37.9% 20% 64.9% 68% 26.9% 45.9% 32.3%
Romine, Austin det 1068 -1 45.9% 11.7% 32.4% 20.5% 61.3% 67.4% 31.6% 47.2% 30.9%
Wolters, Tony col 1000 -1 47.4% 21.6% 46.8% 22.9% 64.2% 66% 40.5% 47.6% 15.7%
Gallagher, Cam kc 540 -1 49.3% 15.2% 41.4% 10% 68.3% 57.6% 40% 67.5% 22.4%
Wallach, Chad mia 518 -1 45.9% 17.9% 43.5% 15.8% 65.5% 60% 28.1% 55.5% 24.6%
Chirinos, Robinson nym 780 -1 46.7% 22.6% 41.1% 20.8% 63.6% 70.4% 36.6% 39.4% 28.9%
Greiner, Grayson det 488 -1 46.3% 34.2% 68.3% 24% 54.3% 61% 25% 41.7% 8.3%
Odom, Joseph sea 458 -1 43.4% 14.3% 53.5% 27.8% 54.3% 55.6% 15.6% 48.5% 30.4%
Maldonado, Martín hou 1828 -2 47.8% 19.4% 47% 23.5% 64.2% 68.2% 25% 54.3% 22%
Sánchez, Gary nyy 1153 -2 47.6% 13% 32.3% 12.8% 64.3% 68.6% 24.7% 52.4% 42.7%
Torrens, Luis sea 610 -2 45.9% 20.5% 46.9% 19.4% 63.8% 56.2% 37.1% 49.6% 19%
Pérez, Michael tb 729 -2 46.4% 18.6% 64.2% 24.3% 63.3% 57.1% 20% 45.9% 18.7%
Gomes, Yan was 886 -2 44.8% 20.3% 37.4% 16.2% 67.3% 61.2% 38.4% 45.7% 16.2%
Alfaro, Jorge mia 744 -3 41.7% 14.7% 47.8% 18.6% 58.6% 56.2% 20.7% 45.1% 16.9%
Plawecki, Kevin bos 594 -3 43.3% 18.2% 49.4% 16.1% 62.6% 59% 31.6% 41.6% 19.7%
Sisco, Chance bal 695 -3 46% 18.8% 31.6% 14.3% 68.3% 57.4% 32.7% 48.9% 21.2%
Severino, Pedro bal 994 -4 45.8% 24.6% 38.8% 16.3% 64.6% 64.6% 33.8% 45.2% 28.5%
Suzuki, Kurt was 879 -4 43.8% 22.6% 31.9% 12.1% 64.4% 64.6% 35.6% 43.5% 17.3%
Zunino, Mike tb 1276 -5 45.4% 17.6% 49.2% 26.4% 60.2% 65.6% 22.2% 45.1% 19.7%
Smith, Will la 1131 -5 43.9% 13.3% 50.4% 23.3% 62.3% 63% 33% 46.2% 22.5%