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
▾
2024
▾
Min Called Pitches: Qualified
▾


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 3,214 16 52.5% 23.3% 57.4% 28.4% 64.6% 70.5% 29.8% 54.8% 32.2%
Raleigh, Cal sea 3,404 13 49.1% 22.4% 55% 30% 60.9% 68.5% 30% 46.3% 28.4%
Wells, Austin nyy 3,111 12 48.6% 23% 49.3% 23.9% 58.1% 66% 31.5% 55.1% 29.3%
Trevino, Jose nyy 1,890 10 50.7% 22.3% 47.3% 19% 61% 74.4% 33.6% 52.4% 35.7%
Kirk, Alejandro tor 2,586 10 49.8% 21.7% 50.7% 21.9% 67.3% 61.2% 34.6% 56.1% 28.8%
Rogers, Jake det 2,525 9 51% 19.6% 52.6% 26.7% 61.7% 64.3% 35.5% 59% 30.1%
Naylor, Bo cle 3,105 8 49.3% 23.9% 48.4% 19.6% 66.9% 68.1% 34.8% 50.2% 22%
Grandal, Yasmani pit 1,843 6 48.8% 12.3% 48.8% 29% 47.5% 70.6% 34.4% 52.1% 37.6%
Vázquez, Christian min 2,306 6 49.1% 17.4% 53.5% 29.6% 63.8% 72.8% 27.9% 44.7% 27.7%
Hedges, Austin cle 1,464 6 50.8% 29.2% 53.1% 18.3% 62.2% 69.8% 30.6% 54.6% 24.8%
Alvarez, Francisco nym 2,754 6 46.7% 15.2% 48% 22.1% 52.3% 66.2% 35.7% 53.9% 28.4%
Jackson, Alex tb 1,297 4 50.9% 11.3% 53.7% 26.2% 55.6% 71.6% 17% 58.2% 29.6%
Caratini, Victor hou 1,581 3 49.1% 19.6% 52.2% 29.6% 65.4% 68.6% 30% 48% 24.1%
Murphy, Sean atl 1,950 2 47.3% 13% 44.3% 22% 55.2% 69.4% 30.6% 54.9% 23%
Rortvedt, Ben tb 2,445 2 46.8% 12.5% 52.6% 20.7% 54.8% 68% 27.3% 48.6% 31.5%
Moreno, Gabriel ari 2,436 2 47.4% 17.9% 37.1% 16% 60.7% 65.5% 36.4% 59% 21.9%
Herrera, Jose ari 984 2 48.5% 14.9% 52.9% 28.3% 58.5% 65.2% 30.6% 46.6% 30%
Díaz, Elias sd 2,138 2 46.9% 31.4% 57.5% 32.4% 66.3% 61.6% 22.2% 37% 14%
McGuire, Reese bos 1,201 2 50.3% 24.4% 44.9% 26.2% 61% 66.5% 33.3% 63.1% 27.1%
Torrens, Luis nym 1,019 1 48.9% 19.2% 53.8% 10.3% 63.3% 66.8% 30.6% 53.4% 26.2%
Herrera, Iván stl 1,551 1 47.5% 17.3% 42.6% 14% 63.8% 62.5% 34% 55.7% 27.9%
Kelly, Carson tex 2,161 1 48.5% 15.6% 40.8% 31.8% 64.1% 68.9% 35.2% 52.2% 26%
Pagés, Pedro stl 1,779 1 45.8% 23.1% 48.6% 17.1% 63% 61.5% 29% 46.9% 18.2%
Higashioka, Kyle sd 2,383 1 47.5% 18.1% 47.7% 23.5% 59% 66.3% 31.4% 54% 23.4%
Contreras, William mil 3,609 0 48% 15.3% 43.8% 25.6% 59.4% 67% 34.9% 54.1% 28%
d'Arnaud, Travis atl 2,235 0 47.2% 21.7% 51.9% 20.3% 59% 64.5% 28.6% 51.1% 19.4%
Nido, Tomás chc 1,184 0 45.7% 11.3% 48% 24.4% 42.3% 77.1% 28.4% 45.2% 25.2%
Barnes, Austin la 1,158 0 45% 12.1% 39.4% 10.7% 58.4% 66.7% 21.1% 52.2% 31.5%
Fortes, Nick mia 2,922 -1 46.4% 22.2% 41.7% 20.8% 57.1% 64.3% 32.5% 52.8% 26%
Fermin, Freddy kc 2,232 -1 47.8% 13.9% 38.5% 19.1% 57.2% 67.3% 27% 63.9% 26.8%
O'Hoppe, Logan ana 3,475 -1 44.8% 24.8% 48.3% 22.2% 61.8% 57.4% 32.7% 46% 19.5%
Heim, Jonah tex 3,130 -1 47% 22% 42.6% 29.3% 61.5% 66.3% 29% 48% 21.5%
Stephenson, Tyler cin 3,344 -1 44.5% 20.3% 51.9% 32.3% 55.1% 67.6% 20.9% 43.3% 18.2%
Ruiz, Keibert was 3,129 -1 45% 19.2% 45.7% 25.3% 61.2% 66.8% 22% 44.2% 20.6%
Perez, Salvador kc 2,796 -2 46.9% 16.9% 45.7% 17.9% 59% 64.9% 37.4% 50.9% 25%
Casali, Curt sf 1,166 -2 47.2% 25% 48.1% 22.4% 61.8% 64.5% 29.6% 52.9% 15.7%
Stubbs, Garrett phi 1,362 -2 43.8% 11.8% 35.5% 8.8% 55.6% 61.4% 26.8% 52.9% 25%
Contreras, Willson stl 1,392 -2 44.1% 12.8% 52.6% 19.8% 62.3% 59.2% 30.1% 45.3% 18.5%
Bart, Joey pit 1,862 -2 43.6% 8.8% 38.7% 32.3% 48.2% 69.1% 19.8% 49.8% 27.1%
Jansen, Danny bos 2,175 -3 43.5% 20.6% 47.7% 16.5% 59.8% 63.7% 27.5% 38.9% 20.3%
Realmuto, J.T. phi 2,966 -3 45.2% 12.6% 37.8% 12.5% 62.2% 62.3% 34% 52.3% 19.7%
Maldonado, Martín cws 1,353 -3 42.4% 15.4% 43% 26.7% 53% 67% 20.5% 37.6% 19.9%
Rutschman, Adley bal 2,996 -3 46% 33.2% 54% 33.3% 62% 65% 26.2% 38.5% 13.8%
Thaiss, Matt ana 1,154 -3 42.4% 23.4% 44.4% 19.3% 57.5% 58.8% 25% 44.1% 14.4%
McCann, Kyle oak 1,113 -3 44.9% 13.6% 42.6% 21.3% 55.6% 66% 32.8% 46.3% 22.7%
Bethancourt, Christian chc 1,338 -4 45.3% 20.9% 45.2% 29% 65.7% 68.2% 25% 41.8% 13.3%
Maile, Luke cin 1,248 -4 40.6% 9.8% 52.3% 28.2% 48% 69.6% 15.8% 35.6% 11.3%
Adams, Riley was 1,100 -4 41.5% 6.8% 41.3% 11.5% 53% 57.6% 35.6% 50% 26.8%
McCann, James bal 1,814 -5 44.8% 25% 49.6% 26% 54% 58.6% 27.2% 52.6% 19.4%
Amaya, Miguel chc 3,091 -5 45.9% 27.3% 52.5% 22.1% 55.8% 62.2% 27.4% 48.9% 23.4%
Langeliers, Shea oak 3,680 -5 43.9% 18.8% 50.4% 25% 59.4% 66.4% 19.7% 39.1% 18.3%
Stallings, Jacob col 2,144 -7 42.7% 13.6% 46% 18.5% 57.1% 65% 24.4% 42.1% 24.2%
Jeffers, Ryan min 2,280 -7 44.6% 19.2% 50.5% 19.2% 55.7% 59.5% 31% 52% 15.6%
Lee, Korey cws 2,990 -7 43% 18.9% 45.5% 13.7% 60.2% 60.6% 23.2% 48.6% 19.3%
Diaz, Yainer hou 3,083 -7 45.2% 19.4% 54.4% 26.6% 61.6% 62.7% 23% 40.8% 22.4%
Wong, Connor bos 2,868 -7 45.5% 12.1% 46.4% 20.2% 55.2% 68.5% 32.8% 48.9% 19.5%
Campusano, Luis sd 2,130 -8 44% 17.7% 49.7% 20.7% 46.7% 69.1% 25.2% 48% 24.4%
Smith, Will la 3,913 -10 43.6% 18.4% 46.9% 19.7% 58% 61.7% 29.7% 46.9% 19.8%