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
▾
2025
▾
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
Kirk, Alejandro tor 1,434 6 49.2% 18.6% 43.5% 17.6% 64% 57.6% 37.9% 57.2% 27.4%
Moreno, Gabriel ari 1,381 5 45.8% 16.5% 41% 11.5% 58.5% 57.9% 31.9% 56.3% 28.6%
Narváez, Carlos bos 1,493 5 45% 14.4% 47.2% 24.1% 59.7% 62.9% 26.3% 45.4% 23.3%
Bailey, Patrick sf 1,367 5 47% 19.4% 42.5% 26.5% 61.8% 59.5% 38.1% 53.9% 27.1%
Dingler, Dillon det 1,433 5 46.7% 13.3% 46.9% 14.5% 51.7% 65.1% 32% 55.5% 28.4%
Wells, Austin nyy 1,519 4 45.4% 13.5% 37.6% 19.8% 52.5% 64.9% 25.7% 60.3% 28.5%
Escarra, J.C. nyy 480 3 50.6% 16.7% 48.8% 50% 45.6% 66.1% 26.1% 66.4% 35.3%
Pagés, Pedro stl 1,357 2 44.8% 16.7% 37.5% 15.4% 55.4% 63.6% 32.9% 57.1% 22.5%
Hedges, Austin cle 575 2 48% 28.1% 56.5% 35.3% 59.8% 60.9% 37.8% 39.7% 26.2%
Raleigh, Cal sea 1,577 2 43.4% 20% 44.1% 26.9% 59.3% 57.6% 22.2% 46.8% 20.1%
Rutschman, Adley bal 1,376 1 43.8% 19.3% 41.8% 18.3% 57.3% 59.8% 32.7% 45.6% 26.7%
Heineman, Tyler tor 482 1 46.5% 20% 44.3% 25% 51.5% 68.7% 37.1% 50% 29.5%
Naylor, Bo cle 1,525 1 43.3% 20% 43.5% 19.6% 64% 57% 26.3% 45.6% 19.3%
Wong, Connor bos 533 1 43.2% 6.1% 35.7% 9.1% 58.6% 68% 32.7% 46.3% 18%
Langeliers, Shea ath 1,641 1 40.9% 10.6% 39.7% 18.7% 46.3% 62.5% 19.5% 45.2% 21.6%
Contreras, William mil 1,818 1 44.1% 20.2% 42% 13.6% 59.8% 57.1% 23% 52.4% 21%
Fortes, Nick mia 725 1 46.3% 10% 36.7% 17.4% 58.1% 61.5% 30.2% 61.1% 16.1%
Baldwin, Drake atl 864 1 46.1% 7.3% 39.5% 6.7% 54.3% 57.6% 40.6% 57.1% 27.7%
Murphy, Sean atl 1,156 1 42% 11.6% 36.2% 20.6% 45.5% 62.8% 26% 49.8% 24%
Huff, Sam sf 509 1 43.2% 19.2% 52.5% 17.2% 60.9% 56% 21.3% 45.2% 15.9%
Torrens, Luis nym 967 1 42.5% 11.5% 36.7% 23.2% 50.6% 63.5% 23.1% 52.7% 20.9%
Maldonado, Martín sd 873 0 41.7% 15.2% 50.8% 28.9% 49% 60.5% 23.7% 43.5% 21.1%
Herrera, Jose ari 763 0 42.1% 12% 38.8% 17.5% 51.9% 63.6% 29.4% 45.5% 23.3%
Trevino, Jose cin 1,127 0 41.9% 6.2% 47.8% 16.7% 42.5% 70.4% 14.3% 41.1% 24.3%
Ramírez, Agustín mia 604 0 45% 6.7% 55.4% 5.3% 51.8% 59.6% 32.4% 57.2% 23%
Amaya, Miguel chc 764 0 42.1% 10.7% 37.2% 29.5% 49.7% 67.6% 24.3% 48.6% 12.3%
Pozo, Yohel stl 450 0 43.6% 9.5% 48.6% 37.5% 59.5% 50.6% 40% 41.2% 8.7%
Higashioka, Kyle tex 705 0 42.6% 21.6% 31.8% 10.9% 50.8% 61.2% 38.7% 53.8% 17.9%
Fermin, Freddy kc 959 0 43.3% 15.2% 35.2% 11.9% 62% 61.3% 29.2% 48.8% 23.2%
Heim, Jonah tex 1,233 0 41.9% 13.7% 35.2% 17.5% 50% 63.3% 17.9% 52.2% 20.2%
Stallings, Jacob col 754 0 44.4% 14.3% 49.4% 11.1% 54.2% 57.2% 38.8% 46.1% 13%
Perez, Salvador kc 1,044 0 43.7% 20.8% 49.7% 20% 63.1% 50% 28.6% 48.4% 14.6%
Stephenson, Tyler cin 677 -1 41.2% 16.7% 37.5% 15.2% 53.8% 58.9% 14.7% 45.7% 15.7%
Caratini, Victor hou 731 -1 41.7% 16.9% 47.1% 11.9% 44.9% 65.7% 19.1% 44.9% 29%
Thaiss, Matt tb 910 -1 37.5% 12.8% 32.5% 23.8% 53.5% 62.6% 17% 41.8% 8.2%
Rortvedt, Ben tb 611 -1 38.3% 0% 36.4% 21.4% 28.2% 64.7% 19% 48.5% 16.4%
Kelly, Carson chc 1,091 -1 41% 12.7% 49% 18.1% 53.3% 56.8% 9.6% 45.9% 16.2%
Davis, Henry pit 785 -1 41% 16.1% 44.6% 11.1% 40.8% 62% 16.7% 52.5% 25.6%
Goodman, Hunter col 1,185 -1 42.2% 12.4% 45% 21.4% 53.1% 62.9% 26.4% 42.3% 20.5%
Hicks, Liam mia 759 -1 40.6% 16.9% 44.4% 26.9% 44.2% 57.9% 19.1% 49.5% 21.3%
d'Arnaud, Travis ana 782 -1 42.2% 18.4% 40.2% 14.1% 59.8% 64.7% 17.3% 43.1% 15%
Vázquez, Christian min 932 -1 40.6% 19.4% 42.6% 17.7% 49.7% 55% 26.2% 43.6% 18.9%
Garver, Mitch sea 472 -1 37.5% 12.5% 28.1% 15.4% 47.6% 51% 36.4% 44.7% 15.8%
Jeffers, Ryan min 1,116 -2 40.7% 18.8% 47.3% 9.5% 53.4% 56.3% 26.9% 42.1% 15.1%
Diaz, Yainer hou 1,390 -2 39.6% 12.6% 39.5% 19% 54.6% 56.7% 25% 44% 15.7%
Realmuto, J.T. phi 1,770 -2 41.1% 22.7% 38.2% 14.6% 62.4% 50.8% 16.4% 45.5% 14.1%
Adams, Riley was 444 -2 35.1% 5.7% 41.7% 21.1% 46.7% 45.7% 18.2% 43.2% 9.5%
Bart, Joey pit 1,061 -2 40.7% 9.4% 32.9% 23.1% 53.2% 61.8% 29.4% 47.5% 17.5%
Díaz, Elias sd 1,158 -3 39.4% 26.2% 42.1% 21.3% 57.1% 51.4% 34.6% 35.3% 7.8%
Quero, Edgar cws 846 -3 35.6% 4.2% 43% 11.6% 36.3% 54.3% 16% 43.8% 21.4%
Alvarez, Francisco nym 923 -4 37.9% 14.6% 40.5% 11.1% 44.7% 57.5% 24.5% 43.3% 16.5%
O'Hoppe, Logan ana 1,363 -4 39.6% 19.3% 47.1% 18% 49% 53.3% 22.2% 38.9% 21.3%
Jansen, Danny tb 1,180 -5 38% 11.8% 37.6% 5.3% 55.8% 55% 30.8% 38.3% 22.6%
Smith, Will la 1,596 -5 41.2% 6.7% 32.9% 17.1% 57.7% 53.4% 22.3% 49.6% 24.4%
Ruiz, Keibert was 1,787 -6 38.6% 9.5% 39.6% 22% 55.7% 53.8% 20.3% 42.5% 12.8%