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
Bailey, Patrick sf 1993 9 51.9% 24.6% 52.2% 28% 62.6% 70% 29.9% 57.1% 32%
Trevino, Jose nyy 1442 8 51.8% 23.5% 45.6% 19.2% 64.9% 75.3% 33.3% 54.1% 33.5%
Raleigh, Cal sea 2062 7 49.3% 19.2% 55.8% 28.1% 61.8% 68.5% 32.1% 46.7% 28%
Wells, Austin nyy 1519 6 49.1% 19.2% 43.4% 23.4% 57.6% 69.4% 38% 58.1% 32.4%
Naylor, Bo cle 1774 5 50.3% 21.5% 42.3% 21.3% 65.1% 70.8% 35.3% 55.2% 23.2%
Grandal, Yasmani pit 1113 5 50.2% 14.3% 49% 29.7% 48.6% 71.2% 38.9% 54.4% 40%
Rogers, Jake det 1402 5 51.1% 20% 48.2% 24.1% 61.2% 60.7% 40.5% 62% 33.8%
Kirk, Alejandro tor 1406 5 50.5% 18.9% 55.2% 24.1% 68.2% 62.2% 36.1% 55.4% 26.7%
Hedges, Austin cle 783 4 53% 33.3% 47.8% 22.9% 56.7% 72.8% 35% 60% 35.2%
Díaz, Elias col 1609 4 47.5% 29.3% 57.5% 35.5% 67.7% 63.7% 21.7% 39.5% 13%
Vázquez, Christian min 1468 4 49.3% 13.6% 51.1% 30.3% 68.8% 72.3% 29.9% 44.2% 26.8%
Rortvedt, Ben tb 1581 3 49.1% 14.2% 52.6% 20% 56.3% 72.1% 28.1% 51.3% 32.8%
Higashioka, Kyle sd 1190 3 48.2% 15.5% 46.6% 21.2% 60.5% 68.3% 38% 57.7% 24.5%
Alvarez, Francisco nym 1170 3 48.1% 14.5% 49.2% 18.2% 49.2% 70.2% 31.6% 56.1% 36.4%
Moreno, Gabriel ari 1955 2 47.3% 17.9% 37.9% 18.3% 62% 65.4% 37.6% 56.5% 23.5%
Jackson, Alex tb 865 2 50.2% 9.6% 50% 27.1% 55.2% 70% 17.1% 60.7% 30.3%
Knizner, Andrew tex 710 2 48.7% 16.2% 44.1% 21.4% 59.3% 66.5% 47.2% 53.2% 15.1%
Stephenson, Tyler cin 1838 2 44.2% 18.6% 50.7% 31.6% 50.7% 68.5% 22.9% 46.7% 18.5%
Kelly, Carson det 1417 1 48.3% 16.5% 39.3% 25% 66.3% 70.5% 36.1% 49.2% 29.1%
Nido, Tomás chc 1152 1 45.6% 11.3% 47.6% 23.1% 42.5% 77% 28.4% 45.7% 25.7%
Murphy, Sean atl 908 1 46.9% 12.2% 40.4% 30.8% 54.6% 70.2% 36.6% 53.4% 19.6%
McGuire, Reese bos 1153 1 50.6% 25% 43.8% 25% 61.7% 67% 34.8% 63% 26.6%
Pagés, Pedro stl 862 0 43.9% 28.8% 43.7% 18.9% 64.3% 56.6% 25% 49.1% 12.6%
Fermin, Freddy kc 1365 0 48% 12.5% 36.2% 25% 59.1% 62.9% 31.5% 67.4% 27.4%
Amaya, Miguel chc 1944 0 46.9% 23.3% 50.6% 20.6% 55.2% 63.8% 28.9% 53.6% 25.7%
Caratini, Victor hou 945 0 46.2% 20.3% 47.2% 16.1% 63% 68.5% 29.8% 46.3% 20.5%
Barnes, Austin la 775 0 44.9% 11.3% 38.7% 7.9% 54.9% 67.4% 22% 52% 34.2%
Perez, Salvador kc 1706 0 47.4% 14.8% 42.2% 17.8% 58% 67.5% 38.6% 53.4% 26.7%
Realmuto, J.T. phi 1575 -1 46.1% 16.7% 33.9% 10.7% 62.2% 64% 35.3% 53.2% 20.8%
Herrera, Iván stl 1166 -1 45.9% 16.7% 35.9% 12.7% 65.1% 62.3% 28.2% 54.7% 29.9%
Fortes, Nick mia 1899 -1 46.8% 15.9% 39% 16.5% 55.2% 68.3% 34.9% 55.6% 28.1%
Jansen, Danny tor 1389 -1 44.1% 16.9% 48.6% 13% 59.5% 65.2% 25% 42.5% 20.5%
Heim, Jonah tex 2086 -1 46.6% 14.9% 37% 29.1% 62.9% 68.7% 30.2% 49.6% 21.6%
Contreras, Willson stl 912 -1 45.7% 6.3% 45.9% 16.7% 62.5% 63.5% 35.3% 49.5% 21.4%
O'Hoppe, Logan ana 2364 -1 44.1% 24.7% 47.6% 23.8% 61.9% 57.1% 28.6% 43.4% 20.5%
McCann, Kyle oak 789 -1 44.2% 8.5% 43.3% 20% 51% 62.2% 34% 51% 23.1%
Ruiz, Keibert was 1806 -1 44.5% 20.6% 43.3% 25.5% 63.3% 65.6% 24.5% 42.2% 15.6%
Davis, Henry pit 710 -1 43.2% 8.9% 43.4% 21.9% 47.8% 71% 29.5% 54% 17.9%
Bart, Joey pit 930 -1 44.7% 10% 32.8% 32.7% 49.2% 72.8% 18.2% 50.3% 29.4%
Adams, Riley was 902 -2 42.4% 6.9% 40.7% 13.8% 53.3% 59.2% 41% 49% 26.4%
Contreras, William mil 2354 -2 46.4% 16.8% 41.5% 25.2% 58.3% 62.9% 34.1% 53.4% 24.2%
Narváez, Omar nym 690 -2 42% 18.5% 39.8% 21.7% 52.6% 56.7% 24.4% 57.9% 14.5%
d'Arnaud, Travis atl 1443 -2 46.5% 18.1% 52% 15.6% 58% 64.7% 27.5% 51.1% 18.4%
Barnhart, Tucker ari 794 -2 41.1% 0% 39.1% 10.9% 56.8% 56.8% 17.5% 47.9% 21.1%
Maile, Luke cin 956 -3 40.1% 11.9% 48.5% 26.9% 48.1% 68.6% 15.5% 35.3% 10.5%
Smith, Will la 2172 -3 43.9% 17.2% 43.4% 23.5% 54.3% 64.1% 28.7% 50.7% 20%
Gomes, Yan chc 813 -3 40.6% 19.7% 45.9% 26.1% 52.2% 63.4% 20.5% 41.4% 8.3%
Stubbs, Garrett phi 950 -3 42.5% 11.5% 34% 9.1% 58.6% 58.7% 26.4% 50.6% 24%
Maldonado, Martín cws 1353 -3 42.4% 15.4% 43% 26.7% 53% 67% 20.5% 37.6% 19.9%
Lee, Korey cws 1768 -3 43.6% 15.9% 40.7% 14.9% 55% 65.6% 22.6% 51.6% 21.4%
Rutschman, Adley bal 1844 -3 45.7% 29.2% 52.6% 35.9% 59.9% 63.2% 27.9% 41.8% 13%
Bethancourt, Christian mia 813 -3 44.3% 18.8% 41.7% 24.4% 64.6% 71.2% 17.9% 40% 14.1%
Jeffers, Ryan min 1394 -4 45.1% 22.4% 48.8% 19.2% 54.1% 57.8% 32.9% 54.8% 17%
Langeliers, Shea oak 2276 -4 43.8% 19.2% 47.8% 24.8% 58% 67% 22.6% 39.6% 17.2%
Stallings, Jacob col 1371 -4 43.2% 12.7% 49.3% 16.7% 54.6% 64.7% 32.9% 41.3% 24.4%
Campusano, Luis sd 1648 -5 44.2% 19.5% 50.9% 20.5% 45.5% 68.1% 25.5% 49.5% 25.4%
McCann, James bal 1178 -5 42.7% 15.6% 44.7% 21.1% 50.3% 58.8% 24.6% 54.7% 18.2%
Wong, Connor bos 1794 -5 45% 10.4% 44.9% 15.2% 57.3% 66% 36.4% 50.5% 18.8%
Diaz, Yainer hou 1951 -7 43.7% 17.8% 50.2% 29% 61.1% 62.3% 20.4% 37.5% 23.3%