Brayan Pena having great year behind the dish

Early on, the story with Brayan Pena was the surprising offensive performance the Reds got from him during April.  His bat has cooled off a lot since then, and his overall hitting numbers are now more or less on par with his career numbers: 80 wRC+ in 2014, 73 wRC+ career, 80-81 wRC+ projected by ZiPS and Steamer over the rest of the season.  That's good for something like a 0.3-0.4 WAR catcher by the end of the season.

I noticed this today, however:

Pena (highlighted) is already at +9.5 context-specific runs saved by his framing skills!  If you remove context (specific count), he's only +3 overall.  But that's still very solid when we're just over a third of the season played.

Entering the season, Harry Pavlidis projected Pena at +4 runs from framing alone.  Therefore, he's probably already shot past that projection.  This is great to see, and is consistent with what some of the twitter-verse told me as the season began.

Pena's other fielding numbers have been good: 36% CS rate (26% league average), and +4 runs by Chris Dial's catching system against stolen bases, passed balls, and errors.  I don't like him that much as the team's backup first-baseman, but he's been everything you could ask in a backup catcher.  And, very clear, he has been a terrific guy in the clubhouse.

Quick bit of prognostication: if we split the difference between the context-specific and context-neutral framing numbers (+6 runs), give him +4 runs for his other fielding performances, that gives him +10 runs on the season.  If he can double that, he'd end up a +20 fielder, which is worth 2 WAR.  I don't know if he'll do that, but even 1-1.5 WAR by season's end would be a solid performance from a backup!

Why the Confusion on the New Home Plate Collision Rule?

Photo Credit: Allan Foster

I was extremely pleased when baseball rolled out their new rules to help eliminate--or at least reduce--home plate collisions.  Unlike a lot of Reds fans (from what I gather...), I think Pete Rose was a jerk for laying out Ray Fosse in the 1970 All Star game.  I don't like seeing players get hurt out of some ridiculous sense of manly tradition.  I'd be glad to see them go.

Unfortunately, the implementation of the new rule has had its share of hiccups.  The rule has a challenging job, and thus implementation is a challenge.  The goal is to keep catchers experiencing unnecessary collisions while simultaneously keeping things fair for the runner.

Today, it didn't seem to work very well.  C. Trent has a nice piece tonight at the Enquirer talking about the controversial play involving Roger Bernadina trying to score on the Pirates Tony Sanchez today.  He does a good job reviewing that play and everyone's reactions to it, so I'll just send you there to read up on it.  In short, everyone says they're confused by the ruling today.

Is the rule really so confusing?  Here's the complete rule 7.13, including the very important "comment" section.

OFFICIAL BASEBALL RULE 7.13
Collisions at home plate

A runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate). If, in the judgment of the umpire, a runner attempting to score initiates contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) in such a manner, the umpire shall declare the runner out (even if the player covering home plate loses possession of the ball). In such circumstances, the umpire shall call the ball dead, and all other baserunners shall return to the last base touched at the time of the collision.

Rule 7.13 comment: The failure by the runner to make an effort to touch the plate, the runner's lowering of the shoulder, or the runner's pushing through with his hands, elbows or arms, would support a determination that the runner deviated from the pathway in order to initiate contact with the catcher in violation of Rule 7.13. If the runner slides into the plate in an appropriate manner, he shall not be adjudged to have violated Rule 7.13. A slide shall be deemed appropriate, in the case of a feet first slide, if the runner's buttocks and legs should hit the ground before contact with the catcher. In the case of a head first slide, a runner shall be deemed to have slid appropriately if his body should hit the ground before contact with the catcher. 

Unless the catcher is in possession of the ball, the catcher cannot block the pathway of the runner as he is attempting to score. If, in the judgment of the umpire, the catcher without possession of the ball blocks the pathway of the runner, the umpire shall call or signal the runner safe. Notwithstanding the above, it shall not be considered a violation of this Rule 7.13 if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in order to field a throw, and the umpire determines that the catcher could not have fielded the ball without blocking the pathway of the runner and that contact with the runner was unavoidable.

Frankly, this seems pretty straightforward.  Here's my interpretation:

• First, there's the runner.  The runner cannot initiate contact with the catcher, and is explicitly forbidden from lowering his shoulder, pushing with his hands, etc.  If, however, he slides for the bag (i.e. not a take-out slide), he's doing it right.
• Second, there's the catcher.  The catcher is required to leave a path for the runner to score unless they have the ball.  The one exception is that the catcher has a right to receive a throw, even if that takes them into the path of the runner.  So, the catcher can't set up in front of the plate, but if the throw brings him into the baserunner's path (as a good throw sometimes will), he has the right to move into the path as you catch the ball.

There's unquestionably going to be some subjectivity when it comes to applying the rule, especially when it comes to that exception for fielding a throw.  But if the events were as Bernadina and Price (and even Sanchez!) report, and Tony Sanchez did indeed have his body in the basepath throughout the entire play, and not just when trying to catch the ball, then Bernadina should have been called safe.  The rule seems clear as day on this.

The same situation arose in Toronto in a game vs. the Yankees, and Josh Thole sorta-kinda was in front of the plate as Francisco Cervilli slid.  The difference to me, however, was that Thole was a) standing (there was still a path to the plate) and b) moving away from the plate and into the path of the baserunner to intercept the throw as the ball came in.  It's a judgement call, but to me, it looks like a fair play by Thole.

As the photo from today's game that C. Trent posted indicates, however, Sanchez was already crouching in front of home plate before he received the ball.  When I watch the replays of that play, it again appears to me that Sanchez was set up, crouched, and in the path of the baserunner before he could reasonably said to be going after the throw from Jordy Mercer.  Admittedly, though, because none of the cameras, are focused on Sanchez the entire time, it is hard to be completely certain.

Here's the thing: this is exactly the situation that often would result in a home plate collision in the past.  Yes, the throw absolutely beat him to the plate.  But a year ago, Bernadina would have been expected to lay Tony Sanchez out in that situation.  That play is what the rule is designed to prevent.  Here, Bernadina did what he was supposed to do: slide.  But Sanchez did not adhere to his responsibilities under this rule.  He blocked the plate before receiving the ball.  For this rule to work--and I really think it needs to work--it needs to be enforced evenly.

Therefore, I don't think the problem is with the rule.  This is an important rule.  We need to protect catchers from unnecessary violence on the field.  But, at the same time, we need to protect the rights of the runner to not be blocked from home plate, in exactly the same way that they cannot be blocked from other other bases when fielders do not have the ball.

The problem today was not the rule.  It was that the rule was not enforced.

Catcher Framing is a Thing

Devin Mesoraco isn't bad at framing.  But
it's an area where he can improve.
Photo credit: Shawna Pairan

Arguably the biggest change that occurred in the time that I was away from blogging has been the growing realization of how important catcher framing is.  While some of the initial studies were dismissed because of preposterous effect sizes, subsequent work--though more conservative--has found that nevertheless catcher framing is really important...so important that it can completely dwarf the catchers' other contributions, including their offensive contributions.

I've had a longstanding interest in catcher fielding.  At one point, I developed my "own" catching metric that inadvertently converged on work of Chris Dial in an effort to evaluate overall catcher performance due to stolen bases, errors, passed balls, etc.  But I'm way behind on this framing stuff.  Here's an attempt to catch up.

The Data

Last month, Harry Pavlidis and Dan Brooks pushed out a new set of catcher framing statistics that they call RPM (for Regressed Probabilistic Model) framing.  They seem very rigorous.  They are WOWY measures (to account for pitcher influence), include adjustments for umpires, and are regressed to the mean.  Their top-10 table is pretty interesting for Reds fans:

2008-2013 Catcher Framing Leaders, per 7000 opportunities (~1 year)

Jose Molina	35.9
David Ross	32.8
Yasmani Grandal	32.4
Jonathan Lucroy	31.0
Chris Stewart	28.3
Gregg Zaun	23.8
Mike Zunino	23.5
Ryan Hanigan	23.3
Carlos Corporan	22.3
Brian McCann	22.2

Those are totals for 2008-2013...and wow.  Not only was Ryan Hanigan brilliant with his arm, but he also provided outstanding value with framing.  I think it's interesting to see David Ross there near the top, who is another long-standing favorite of mine.  Also right there at the top, despite far less playing time, is former Red farmhand (and exchange currency for Mat Latos), Yasmani Grandal.

But more than the names, look at the magnitude!  +36 runs for Molina?  +23 runs for Hanigan?  That's worth ~3.6 and 2.3 wins apiece!  The swing is something like 50 runs per season.  Honestly, I can hardly believe the size of this effect, and it certainly makes me regret that Hanigan trade--despite my hopes for Devin Mesoraco this year.

And you can see what the Rays are doing here: if Jose Molina and Hanigan can keep doing what they do this year, it (almost) doesn't matter what they do on offense--they're bound to be above-average players.

Also, since they'd already done it for catchers, they can do it for the pitchers as well!  Here's the top 5:

Tom Glavine	40
Tim Dillard	21
Mariano Rivera	20
Francisco Cordero	20
Sam Lecure	18

Heck, yeah, Sam LeCure!  I think it must be the facial hair.  Plus, the guy is unquestionably crafty.  For a right-hander.

Projecting Framing

On Monday, Harry published a set of catcher framing projections for the coming seasons.  Because the RPM data are already regressed, they were able to use a simple 3-2-1 weighting on past years to generate projections for 2014 catchers.  The highlights for Reds players:

Brayan Pena: +4.4 runs
Devin Mesoraco: -6.6 runs

I *think* these are based on projected playing time, rather than a full season of play.  Therefore, Pena is probably a bit better than his +4 rating would suggest.  Last year, for example, he was a +3 player in a half-season of play.

FWIW, Ryan Hanigan projects a +18 runs/season.

I'm going to add these projections to my series preview spreadsheets.  For most players, it doesn't matter much.  But for some, it makes a big difference.  For example, Friday night during the Reds broadcast, Chris Welch correctly pointed out that Travis d'Arnaud is an excellent pitch framer.  He projected as a +16.6 run framer in Harry's data.  Adding that to his other projections pushes his fielding projection to +16 runs, and his WAR projection shoots from +2.5 WAR all the way to +4.1 WAR.  It's a huge boost, but I can't see any reason to discount those projections.

At the team level, with both Jose Molina and Ryan Hanigan behind the dish, the Rays are projected to be +40 runs (4 wins) above average, by framing alone.  It's really impressive.  Catchers are really important.

Catcher Height Matters

One last thing.  Last April, I was listening to an episode of Ben Lindbergh and Sam Miller's excellent Effectively Wild podcast, which was my main link to baseball last season (and is mandatory listening).  On it, Ben mentioned a study that he did that checked whether catcher height was related to framing skill.  In particular, he found that taller catchers, like Joe Mauer, were better at framing pitches that were high in the strike zone.  And further, shorter catchers, like Jonathan Lucroy, were better at framing pitches low in the strike zone.  

It's not a huge effect: the correlation between high strike calls and catcher height was 0.35.  For low strike calls, it was -0.12, which is probably not significant.  But it's a neat idea, and at least for tall catchers, it might be a thing.  If you have a pitcher who lives up in the strike zone, all else being equal, you're best off choosing a taller catcher than a shorter catcher (assuming otherwise equal framing skill).  Fun tidbit!