5 Comments

With the deep count philosophy firmly in place, I think the best chance for even quicker games is ABS. If calibrated to the rulebook definition (any part of the plate with any part of the ball in the strike zone), I think pitchers benefit overall. This presumes the technology is accurate to the rulebook strike zone, adjusted for each player's normal batting stance. We'll eliminate miscalls resulting from missed targets, reachbacks, and umpires' personal interpretations of the strike zone. I think it would translate to more balls in play within shallowe counts as the players adjusted. I've heard others say the opposite, however, because pitching dominates baseball (less than .250 league BA for decades), players should have more incentive to swing if the rulebook definition is ineluctably applied. Have you formed an opinion? PS - I am not advocating for ABS, simply stating what I see as a key ramification if adopted.

Expand full comment

I’m a supporter of ABS if--and only if--the technology is infallible. They’re getting closer. Not there yet.

Expand full comment

Yes. It seems unstoppable in the near future whether we support it or not. In the ideal, it does change so much of the pitching game - umpire zone perspective, catcher framing, and hitter complaints. Well, there will still be those!

Expand full comment

Catcher framing ceases to exist with a straight ABS system.

Expand full comment

That's one of the subjective factors that I won't miss.

Expand full comment