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
▾
2023
▾
Min Called Pitches: 750
▾


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 2,513 16 52.9% 26.8% 54.6% 30.8% 61.4% 66.5% 37.2% 59.3% 31.8%
Hedges, Austin tex 2,025 13 52.5% 27.6% 58.3% 42.2% 53.8% 70% 38.8% 60.7% 26.5%
Heim, Jonah tex 3,657 10 48.5% 20.1% 49.3% 28% 63.5% 69.2% 27.5% 46.9% 24.4%
Alvarez, Francisco nym 3,006 9 48.9% 20.5% 49.1% 28.7% 67.2% 64.2% 35.8% 52.7% 26.1%
Higashioka, Kyle nyy 2,078 7 48.7% 12.7% 41.4% 26% 58.2% 65.8% 32.3% 63.8% 30%
Contreras, William mil 3,310 7 48% 15.1% 50.1% 23.8% 58.1% 65.1% 32.4% 56.2% 26%
Murphy, Sean atl 2,913 7 48.9% 18.3% 44.3% 21.8% 59.5% 62.5% 34.1% 62.5% 24.1%
Raleigh, Cal sea 3,257 6 47.5% 22.4% 50.2% 23% 64.1% 64% 34.6% 46.7% 20.4%
Trevino, Jose nyy 1,450 6 49.9% 20.2% 49% 19% 65% 65.8% 43.5% 56.5% 22.9%
Caratini, Victor mil 1,686 6 47.7% 22.5% 54.8% 23.3% 58.7% 66.7% 26.2% 51.4% 24.6%
Rogers, Jake det 2,751 5 48.7% 19.3% 41.9% 20.6% 56.6% 65.5% 36.8% 60.8% 23.8%
Rutschman, Adley bal 3,064 5 48.3% 22.2% 60.3% 28.1% 69.7% 61.8% 29.6% 42.1% 21%
Kirk, Alejandro tor 2,595 5 49.2% 17% 48% 9.5% 63.9% 61.9% 40.3% 58.6% 24.5%
Gallagher, Cam cle 1,430 5 51.2% 22.2% 49.5% 26.1% 65.9% 65.1% 40% 53.1% 28.9%
Zavala, Seby ari 1,669 5 49.9% 15.7% 53.3% 29% 69.2% 66.1% 40.9% 50.8% 24.6%
Grandal, Yasmani cws 2,369 4 47.4% 18.9% 55.4% 35.1% 56.2% 68.9% 26.5% 48.3% 21.6%
Delay, Jason pit 1,669 4 48.2% 18.6% 48.6% 28.4% 51.3% 69.6% 29% 59.1% 25.3%
d'Arnaud, Travis atl 1,857 4 48.4% 21.4% 49.8% 17.9% 61.5% 63% 33.1% 54.1% 23.1%
Wynns, Austin col 1,346 3 47.5% 20.2% 57.1% 38.2% 59.3% 63.8% 30.2% 44% 17.4%
Fortes, Nick mia 2,662 3 47.4% 18.4% 46.6% 13.8% 59.9% 62.3% 32.7% 56.7% 26.3%
Barnhart, Tucker chc 975 3 49.7% 24.1% 53.2% 26.1% 62.3% 66% 32.6% 54.3% 21.1%
Naylor, Bo cle 1,756 3 47.2% 22.5% 51.6% 25.5% 63.8% 66.4% 26.5% 43.5% 25.8%
Vázquez, Christian min 2,474 3 47.9% 17.3% 47.1% 29.3% 60.4% 66.5% 35% 53.6% 25.6%
Sánchez, Gary sd 1,842 2 48.4% 17.9% 52.5% 27.6% 56.7% 64.7% 30.6% 54% 27.7%
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 1,854 2 47.7% 20.3% 53.7% 19.1% 69% 57.3% 35.3% 49.4% 20.5%
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%
Narváez, Omar nym 1,187 1 45.3% 20.5% 46.2% 26.4% 63.2% 59.2% 26.3% 47.6% 21%
Sabol, Blake sf 1,341 1 49% 20.2% 49% 27.7% 56.9% 74.7% 31.7% 50.9% 22.8%
Zunino, Mike cle 1,070 1 47.2% 26.2% 47.3% 18.6% 68.4% 56.1% 33.9% 52.9% 20.3%
Fermin, Freddy kc 1,660 1 47.6% 12.9% 47.9% 19% 60.1% 60.2% 43.1% 53.1% 27.4%
Barnes, Austin la 1,456 1 47.8% 9.7% 45.3% 16.4% 51.5% 74% 27% 54.2% 34.5%
McGuire, Reese bos 1,409 1 48.1% 23.8% 57.6% 29% 63% 62.9% 34.8% 50.4% 17%
Rodríguez, Endy pit 1,380 0 46.8% 13.9% 54.4% 22% 62.6% 58.9% 37.2% 50% 22.5%
Wallach, Chad ana 1,282 0 46.3% 19.8% 42.3% 14.1% 60.4% 66.8% 36.8% 48.1% 29%
McCann, James bal 1,551 0 46.9% 21.4% 50% 29.2% 65.5% 58.7% 27.3% 52% 18.3%
Moreno, Gabriel ari 3,219 -1 45.6% 15% 38.1% 14.2% 57.8% 57.9% 33.2% 56.5% 26.5%
Thaiss, Matt ana 1,987 -1 46.4% 23.6% 48% 20% 54.7% 68.5% 22.6% 51.7% 25%
Casali, Curt cin 808 -1 44.3% 13.3% 61.7% 11.4% 55.7% 52.3% 27.8% 51.3% 20.3%
Kelly, Carson det 1,212 -1 45.9% 10.8% 54.9% 20% 59.3% 59% 35.2% 50.5% 13.6%
Maile, Luke cin 1,738 -2 42.3% 12.1% 56.4% 26.8% 54.6% 63.9% 20.4% 38.8% 13.5%
Campusano, Luis sd 1,125 -2 45.1% 15.3% 39.9% 26.8% 49.5% 73.5% 20.9% 51.8% 29.1%
Haase, Eric cle 1,706 -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%
Bethancourt, Christian tb 2,505 -2 47% 25.5% 51.9% 26.7% 66.7% 57.4% 27.9% 51.7% 18.1%
Smith, Will la 3,143 -2 44.9% 13.4% 45.1% 21.2% 55.1% 65.1% 27.1% 55.9% 20.2%
Gomes, Yan chc 2,745 -3 44.1% 25.3% 50.7% 18.7% 59.1% 60.7% 29.8% 42.7% 19.5%
Nola, Austin sd 1,333 -3 43.1% 15.1% 50.5% 23.1% 55.3% 60.7% 23.2% 47.1% 20.7%
Murphy, Tom sea 1,016 -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%
Pérez, Carlos oak 958 -3 40% 18.7% 47.8% 31.8% 52.3% 59.9% 21.6% 35.1% 7.9%
Mejía, Francisco tb 1,262 -4 43.5% 9% 49.7% 20% 58.7% 54.9% 25.2% 50.3% 26.7%
Herrera, Jose ari 1,228 -4 41.7% 20.5% 45.8% 30.9% 50.2% 64.6% 22.8% 40% 16.2%
Jeffers, Ryan min 2,216 -4 44.3% 23.7% 55% 19.8% 59.2% 55.6% 30.3% 43.5% 17.1%
Knizner, Andrew stl 2,064 -4 44% 19.6% 59.8% 34.2% 60.7% 61.2% 25.2% 34.4% 12.8%
Contreras, Willson stl 2,765 -5 44.3% 21.3% 50.4% 25.9% 59.8% 59.9% 26.4% 40.2% 18.5%
Adams, Riley was 1,209 -5 42.7% 18.3% 43.2% 23.1% 59.5% 64.4% 27.6% 43.7% 14.9%
Wong, Connor bos 3,073 -5 44% 12.5% 41.6% 26.7% 50.7% 69.7% 24.1% 48.5% 18.6%
Stallings, Jacob mia 2,123 -5 44.1% 16.4% 44.9% 21.1% 55.1% 67.9% 32% 46% 18.1%
O'Hoppe, Logan ana 1,458 -5 41.9% 21.4% 45.7% 12.9% 62.7% 50.5% 28.7% 47.1% 14.7%
Diaz, Yainer hou 1,339 -5 42% 16.4% 44.8% 20.3% 55.2% 62.6% 34.8% 44.5% 17.4%
Perez, Salvador kc 2,469 -7 43.9% 16.3% 48% 15.4% 60.2% 60.3% 29.2% 46.4% 20%
Langeliers, Shea oak 3,642 -8 44% 14.9% 44% 19.2% 49.4% 66.8% 27.1% 47.9% 25.1%
Díaz, Elias col 3,530 -8 43.2% 24.7% 61.2% 26.2% 63.4% 48.3% 28.2% 35.4% 11.9%
Stephenson, Tyler cin 2,436 -9 42% 27.2% 59.5% 33.3% 55.3% 51.5% 25% 35.8% 11.5%
Ruiz, Keibert was 3,676 -13 42.6% 23.1% 53.1% 24.4% 58.1% 58.7% 19.6% 39.6% 17.1%
Realmuto, J.T. phi 4,192 -14 43.9% 11.9% 48.2% 13.9% 61.8% 56.3% 31.3% 46% 20.5%
Maldonado, Martín hou 3,421 -17 41% 25.4% 46.9% 22.8% 53.5% 57.1% 21.9% 40.7% 15.1%