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
Trevino, Jose nyy 2719 17 54% 20.6% 45.3% 19.8% 71.1% 69.1% 40.7% 62.6% 30.9%
Heim, Jonah tex 2918 12 51.6% 31% 58.7% 21.6% 65.9% 70.9% 36.2% 48.2% 26.9%
d'Arnaud, Travis atl 2805 10 48.9% 21.7% 42.8% 25.4% 65.5% 60.1% 38.1% 57% 25.2%
Raleigh, Cal sea 2778 9 49.2% 22% 54.3% 24.5% 65% 62.8% 26.7% 57.4% 26.4%
Kirk, Alejandro tor 1971 9 50.9% 24.3% 47.3% 14.5% 71.3% 60.6% 41.5% 58.7% 21%
Murphy, Sean oak 3263 8 49.7% 25.6% 48.5% 24.5% 61.2% 68.3% 30.1% 54.5% 30.9%
Narváez, Omar mil 2371 6 49.9% 17.6% 46.8% 21.4% 63.7% 67.4% 37.6% 55.2% 24.4%
Serven, Brian col 1560 5 50.1% 15% 60.5% 36.5% 59.2% 68.2% 34.3% 50% 26.4%
Molina, Yadier stl 2202 5 49.1% 27.9% 60.6% 35.8% 63.8% 65.5% 30.4% 43.4% 23%
Nido, Tomás nym 2392 5 50.3% 17.4% 50% 29.5% 58.2% 71.7% 31.4% 54.7% 32.9%
Grandal, Yasmani cws 1702 4 47.8% 15.9% 58.9% 34.2% 62.7% 64.1% 19.3% 46.4% 22.8%
Higashioka, Kyle nyy 1964 4 48.7% 11.7% 43.9% 14% 70.1% 58.8% 40.7% 59.4% 29.7%
Zavala, Seby cws 1375 4 51.6% 19.2% 55.4% 30.1% 67.6% 68.4% 35.7% 55.9% 27.2%
Rutschman, Adley bal 2357 4 49.6% 28.6% 53% 31.4% 68.1% 62.3% 40.5% 55.2% 18.7%
Heineman, Tyler pit 1461 3 48% 15.2% 44.6% 21.3% 61.1% 65% 36.1% 57.4% 26.6%
Kelly, Carson ari 2594 3 47.7% 19.3% 51.1% 19.3% 61.1% 58.4% 36.4% 52.8% 23.6%
McGuire, Reese bos 2096 3 46.9% 32.2% 54.9% 23.5% 68.5% 60.4% 23.2% 45.9% 20.4%
Delay, Jason pit 1448 2 48.6% 28.3% 49.7% 33.3% 55.7% 67.6% 28.9% 55.3% 26.7%
McCann, James nym 1410 2 48.1% 15.1% 53.6% 20.9% 49% 70.7% 25% 55.1% 27.8%
Barnes, Austin la 1525 2 49.8% 11.7% 41.1% 14.6% 57.6% 65.3% 37.6% 67.1% 35.1%
Garcia, Aramis cin 1071 2 49.4% 17.5% 50% 21.6% 71.4% 63.8% 46.2% 48.5% 23.7%
Jeffers, Ryan min 1538 2 48.2% 24.2% 56.8% 17% 64.2% 66.9% 25.8% 45.7% 28.5%
Hedges, Austin cle 2588 1 48.9% 17.3% 46.5% 24.1% 66.4% 66.5% 34.6% 55.3% 28%
Plawecki, Kevin tex 1483 1 48.2% 22.2% 56.3% 33% 62.3% 66.2% 29.3% 46.9% 18.9%
Gomes, Yan chc 1996 1 46.7% 27.2% 56.1% 15.6% 66.8% 55% 31.5% 49.9% 15.9%
Vázquez, Christian hou 2908 1 47.8% 23.1% 55.3% 26.5% 62.9% 63.7% 29.7% 50.3% 22.6%
Caratini, Victor mil 2423 1 48.4% 15.2% 49.8% 20.5% 56.6% 69.8% 32.1% 53% 32%
Sanchez, Gary min 2278 1 47.2% 23.1% 51.3% 22% 60.4% 65.5% 28.6% 53.8% 23.5%
Realmuto, J.T. phi 4144 0 48.1% 21.7% 43.7% 23.5% 66.4% 63.4% 33.2% 52.1% 23.7%
Herrera, Jose ari 1192 0 46.6% 26.8% 38.5% 26.1% 61.7% 69.9% 30.2% 40.8% 24.3%
Bethancourt, Christian tb 1297 0 47.1% 15.2% 46.4% 22.8% 61.8% 67.3% 27% 51.2% 21.8%
Wynns, Austin sf 1324 0 47.7% 14.9% 54.5% 31.8% 63% 65.1% 17.9% 48.2% 22%
Maldonado, Martín hou 3268 0 47.9% 25.6% 53.6% 26.9% 65.7% 61.1% 31.4% 48.7% 20.3%
Stassi, Max ana 2495 0 46.9% 24.8% 46.7% 20.2% 64.6% 58.5% 29.4% 55% 20%
Contreras, Willson chc 2049 0 46% 20.3% 58.3% 22.4% 65.4% 55.5% 31.3% 43% 22.1%
Bart, Joey sf 2315 -1 47% 18% 55% 15.2% 57.2% 68.5% 28.2% 48.8% 26.4%
Fortes, Nick mia 1519 -1 48.7% 22.4% 50.3% 30.9% 62% 65.1% 28.1% 53.4% 23.2%
Jansen, Danny tor 1630 -1 46.8% 16.7% 51.3% 11.8% 67.8% 59.9% 36% 48.3% 19.2%
Maile, Luke cle 1571 -1 44.3% 20.4% 51.3% 21.3% 62.4% 62.5% 24.1% 38.8% 21.4%
Casali, Curt sea 1312 -2 46.6% 19.2% 42.9% 18.8% 59.6% 62.2% 22.7% 52.5% 25.7%
Stephenson, Tyler cin 1355 -2 45.2% 16.8% 44.4% 21.3% 62.2% 63.4% 29.9% 44.8% 26.4%
Smith, Will la 3028 -2 47.1% 19.4% 44.5% 21.5% 61.6% 67.9% 21.1% 52.1% 26.6%
Romine, Austin cin 1197 -2 44.1% 18.9% 54.3% 21.4% 58.2% 63.9% 30.9% 43.2% 14.3%
Alfaro, Jorge sd 1769 -2 46.6% 16.9% 47.6% 34.1% 54% 71.6% 19.5% 47.8% 22.8%
Perez, Michael nym 1210 -3 44.2% 23.1% 46.1% 17% 54.6% 57.3% 32.1% 51.9% 21.7%
Contreras, William atl 1627 -3 45.2% 18.6% 49.8% 24.1% 59.5% 64.5% 25.9% 43.6% 20.4%
Mejía, Francisco tb 1962 -3 46.2% 19.4% 48.5% 20% 59.2% 61.5% 35.9% 52.1% 23.6%
Barnhart, Tucker det 2548 -3 46.9% 16.7% 42.3% 21% 62% 66.4% 25.1% 52.3% 27.3%
Suzuki, Kurt ana 1154 -4 42.5% 16.9% 46.7% 11.7% 63.9% 53.1% 23.9% 48.1% 20%
Stubbs, Garrett phi 988 -4 43.1% 17.2% 36.4% 17.9% 61.2% 52.2% 29.9% 51.8% 20.5%
Ruiz, Keibert was 3118 -4 45.8% 23% 51.2% 25.3% 68.3% 57.7% 34.2% 42.5% 15.6%
Haase, Eric det 1981 -5 44.8% 16.1% 43.9% 25.7% 64.3% 56% 31.7% 50.2% 16.7%
Knizner, Andrew stl 2402 -6 44.2% 17% 49% 23.1% 56.1% 67.3% 21.9% 41.1% 22.1%
Adams, Riley was 1280 -6 42.8% 20% 45.9% 26.3% 61% 59% 31.3% 40.8% 12.8%
Díaz, Elias col 2931 -7 43.9% 26.8% 54.4% 14.7% 65.7% 51.2% 27.8% 40.7% 16.9%
Perez, Salvador kc 2189 -8 43% 23.8% 53.5% 16.7% 64.5% 57.6% 25% 36.9% 15.4%
Stallings, Jacob mia 2950 -8 45.9% 16.2% 43.5% 18.3% 58.5% 58.9% 29.4% 53.9% 26.4%
Nola, Austin sd 3062 -10 46.4% 23.4% 45.2% 21.2% 59.6% 64.4% 29% 49.5% 22.6%
Melendez, MJ kc 2100 -12 41.7% 13.3% 38.2% 11.4% 55.9% 59.8% 27.5% 45.3% 21.1%
Chirinos, Robinson bal 1804 -14 40% 11.6% 41% 18.8% 50.8% 54.5% 32.6% 50.3% 16.9%