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 1005 5 51.5% 23.3% 42.9% 20% 61.8% 76.7% 35.3% 54.8% 32.4%
Raleigh, Cal sea 1440 4 48.5% 20% 52.2% 23.3% 59% 70.8% 30.6% 47.8% 30.4%
Díaz, Elias col 1285 4 47.9% 29.4% 55.4% 33.3% 66.8% 64.7% 24.4% 41.1% 13.4%
Bailey, Patrick sf 1160 4 52.1% 24.6% 51% 26.3% 63% 69.2% 36.3% 56.2% 34.4%
Kirk, Alejandro tor 914 3 52.1% 21.5% 57% 23.3% 69.7% 65.3% 31.3% 57.1% 28.2%
Naylor, Bo cle 1125 3 50.4% 22.8% 46.9% 21.1% 59% 74.7% 34.2% 53.9% 25.5%
Grandal, Yasmani pit 629 3 49.4% 12.5% 47.8% 32.5% 52.2% 67.5% 41.2% 52.7% 35.9%
Wells, Austin nyy 1000 3 49.1% 19.4% 43.6% 23.6% 52.3% 68.9% 40% 60.8% 33%
Rortvedt, Ben tb 1041 3 49.4% 15% 55.6% 19.6% 53.2% 71.7% 26.7% 51.9% 36.3%
Vázquez, Christian min 1056 3 47.9% 9.8% 45.7% 26.7% 67.2% 74.3% 32.2% 44.7% 27.6%
Moreno, Gabriel ari 1407 2 47.8% 16.5% 38.1% 17.6% 64.3% 66.3% 37.7% 56.3% 23.2%
Stephenson, Tyler cin 1255 2 45% 16.7% 49.5% 27.2% 52.3% 71.4% 22.4% 48.2% 21.5%
Hedges, Austin cle 524 2 51% 32.1% 42.3% 19.2% 59% 68.5% 35.1% 57.1% 32.6%
Rogers, Jake det 937 2 51.1% 22% 48.1% 21.6% 61.1% 58.5% 41.3% 63.5% 33%
Knizner, Andrew tex 432 1 50.5% 15.4% 42.9% 15.4% 57.7% 72.4% 51.4% 56.6% 17.8%
Alvarez, Francisco nym 436 1 48.4% 18.2% 49% 19.4% 44.8% 73.2% 42.1% 52% 32%
Heim, Jonah tex 1507 1 47.9% 17.2% 36.1% 29.7% 65.6% 72.1% 33.3% 49.4% 21.8%
McGuire, Reese bos 878 1 49.3% 24.6% 43.5% 29.6% 55.7% 68.8% 31.5% 62.5% 27.5%
Jackson, Alex tb 487 1 49.1% 6.1% 43.1% 23.3% 56.5% 69.1% 16.7% 61.5% 39.6%
Barnes, Austin la 483 1 45.8% 9.4% 34.3% 0% 55.6% 73.3% 29.6% 50% 31.8%
Higashioka, Kyle sd 587 1 47.7% 9.8% 47.8% 16.1% 55.9% 71% 36.1% 59.8% 23.2%
Tromp, Chadwick atl 473 1 46.5% 13.8% 46.4% 15.4% 59% 75% 21.6% 44.6% 22%
Kelly, Carson det 921 1 48.3% 18% 43% 19% 66.1% 71.4% 37.9% 51% 24.6%
Pinto, René tb 441 0 44.7% 21.7% 52.4% 13.8% 55.8% 58.9% 35.3% 45.2% 29.3%
Nido, Tomás nym 776 0 45% 6% 41.6% 18.5% 37.5% 79.7% 25.6% 48.6% 24%
Fermin, Freddy kc 935 0 48.6% 12.1% 38.1% 22.7% 60.3% 60.5% 35.4% 68.9% 26.5%
Contreras, Willson stl 536 0 49.1% 8% 42.9% 17.2% 67.8% 63.7% 41.9% 55% 21.3%
Caratini, Victor hou 812 0 46.2% 17.9% 44.8% 17.3% 63.7% 71.2% 29.3% 48.3% 15.7%
O'Hoppe, Logan ana 1528 0 43.6% 24.1% 50.3% 23.1% 64.2% 57.4% 26.1% 41.4% 16%
Thaiss, Matt ana 434 0 45.6% 13.6% 50% 16% 60.4% 62.9% 35.3% 43.3% 14.3%
Herrera, Iván stl 1146 0 45.6% 16.7% 35.7% 13% 65.6% 61.9% 27.6% 53.7% 30.1%
Bart, Joey pit 570 0 43.9% 9.3% 28.8% 22.9% 47.2% 75% 21.7% 54% 29.3%
d'Arnaud, Travis atl 1061 -1 46.2% 16.4% 52.6% 14.3% 58.5% 66.8% 21.5% 51% 16.1%
Jansen, Danny tor 919 -1 44.4% 18.2% 43.1% 13% 56.9% 67% 25% 42.9% 22.6%
Rutschman, Adley bal 1229 -1 46.1% 29.9% 51.3% 37.5% 61.5% 62.6% 25.7% 46.5% 14.5%
Sánchez, Gary mil 433 -1 43% 16.7% 40.7% 15.8% 63.8% 66.7% 18.2% 40.2% 21.3%
McCann, Kyle oak 559 -1 44.4% 6.8% 38.7% 11.1% 50.9% 64.9% 34.3% 53.1% 26.2%
Perez, Salvador kc 1196 -1 47.2% 10.8% 39.7% 13% 58.5% 66% 35.9% 56.2% 27.6%
Realmuto, J.T. phi 1477 -1 46% 16.2% 33.5% 11.3% 62.1% 64.9% 34.7% 54.2% 20.4%
Stubbs, Garrett phi 442 -1 41.9% 16.7% 33.3% 5% 59.8% 51.6% 21.9% 55.6% 20%
Fortes, Nick mia 1289 -1 46.2% 13% 30.6% 16.4% 55.2% 68.1% 33.3% 59.2% 25.2%
Smith, Will la 1506 -1 45% 15% 40.4% 27.7% 54.2% 65.3% 34.1% 54.3% 21.7%
Amaya, Miguel chc 1304 -1 46.3% 21.4% 48.9% 16.2% 56.1% 63.9% 23.2% 53.7% 27.1%
Wong, Connor bos 1143 -1 45.9% 13.8% 45.6% 17.9% 60% 67% 35.2% 50% 18.6%
Barnhart, Tucker ari 621 -1 39.8% 0% 36.4% 11.9% 57.3% 55.5% 18% 47.2% 18.3%
Maldonado, Martín cws 1069 -2 42.8% 16.7% 43.8% 27.3% 53.8% 66.1% 23.1% 38.9% 19.5%
Maile, Luke cin 676 -2 38.9% 8% 48.5% 30.6% 47.5% 64.1% 16.7% 33.9% 9.5%
Ruiz, Keibert was 1148 -2 43% 18.6% 38.5% 22.4% 65.2% 61.3% 24.7% 42% 14.4%
Bethancourt, Christian mia 729 -2 43.2% 19% 42.7% 20.5% 62.4% 71.3% 16.4% 38.1% 15.2%
Lee, Korey cws 1127 -2 44% 9.6% 38.5% 12.3% 56.4% 64.7% 22.7% 55% 25.2%
Stallings, Jacob col 827 -2 43.2% 14.8% 44.2% 13.5% 53.4% 69.2% 27.3% 38.7% 29.4%
Adams, Riley was 750 -2 42.3% 7.8% 34% 8.5% 53.3% 59.8% 44.4% 50.6% 27.1%
Jeffers, Ryan min 911 -2 45.3% 28.6% 45.9% 15.8% 56.5% 57.6% 41.5% 53.4% 19.3%
Narváez, Omar nym 690 -2 42% 18.5% 39.8% 21.7% 52.6% 56.7% 24.4% 57.9% 14.5%
Davis, Henry pit 692 -2 43.2% 9.3% 43.3% 22.6% 47% 70.2% 29.5% 54.7% 18.3%
Langeliers, Shea oak 1556 -2 44% 18.9% 50% 28% 57.1% 65.1% 24.8% 39.3% 17.1%
Gomes, Yan chc 756 -3 40.2% 20% 46.3% 29.3% 51.4% 63.2% 17.6% 40% 7.4%
McCann, James bal 826 -3 43.8% 21.6% 42.1% 18.9% 48% 59.6% 29.3% 58.8% 20.7%
Contreras, William mil 1665 -3 45.3% 15.5% 37.8% 18.3% 59.9% 61.1% 32.8% 54.4% 23%
Campusano, Luis sd 1460 -3 44.2% 15.5% 50.9% 20.4% 46.6% 68.1% 23.3% 50% 25%
Diaz, Yainer hou 1339 -4 43.5% 20% 52.8% 32% 58.3% 61.1% 20% 36.3% 22.8%