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
Wells, Austin nyy 895 3 46.8% 6.5% 38.9% 24.1% 53.4% 67.6% 32.8% 60.2% 27.1%
Bailey, Patrick sf 820 2 46% 23.8% 40.5% 29.2% 59.1% 57.1% 41.7% 51.1% 22.4%
Dingler, Dillon det 685 2 47.2% 10.3% 51.6% 19.4% 53.7% 64.4% 27.5% 54.9% 29.9%
Moreno, Gabriel ari 738 2 47.4% 13.3% 42.4% 15.4% 56.2% 60.2% 31.3% 58.9% 33.8%
Narváez, Carlos bos 743 2 46% 21.1% 53.5% 25% 60% 66.2% 26.5% 43.8% 15.6%
Kirk, Alejandro tor 821 2 47.1% 15.6% 37.9% 8.3% 66.1% 53.6% 30.3% 56.9% 24.1%
Raleigh, Cal sea 811 2 44.8% 25.9% 50% 20.6% 60.8% 57.9% 25.5% 45.3% 22.6%
Higashioka, Kyle tex 397 1 45.6% 29.2% 32.4% 9.7% 59.7% 63.9% 35% 54.8% 19.6%
Baldwin, Drake atl 410 1 49% 7.7% 52.5% 9.1% 57% 56% 40% 61.9% 29.5%
Langeliers, Shea ath 985 1 41.5% 12% 35.7% 20.8% 50.7% 61.2% 20.5% 42.3% 27.7%
Contreras, William mil 959 1 44.5% 14.3% 39.5% 7.1% 60.1% 57.7% 23.2% 55.5% 21.4%
Escarra, J.C. nyy 253 1 53.8% 19% 65.2% 62.5% 47.9% 63.6% 32% 70.4% 42.1%
Wong, Connor bos 233 1 49.8% 7.7% 46.2% 15.8% 54.5% 75% 45% 57.7% 29.2%
Heim, Jonah tex 631 1 42% 13.6% 36.8% 20.5% 49.6% 62.2% 13.5% 56.4% 18.7%
Senger, Hayden nym 286 1 52.4% 33.3% 50% 33.3% 54.2% 78.1% 21.1% 56.2% 25.9%
Hedges, Austin cle 390 1 47.7% 28.6% 63.3% 26.9% 63.4% 57.5% 34.8% 38.8% 21.9%
Naylor, Bo cle 790 1 45.3% 28.4% 41.8% 19% 71.5% 59.5% 31.1% 46.8% 17.7%
d'Arnaud, Travis ana 331 0 42.3% 15.4% 39.4% 17.6% 65.7% 69.2% 13.8% 38.7% 7.1%
Caratini, Victor hou 334 0 40.4% 12.5% 45.5% 9.1% 50.8% 60.6% 23.5% 39.3% 32.3%
Rutschman, Adley bal 770 0 42.6% 14% 41.2% 20% 55.6% 54% 31.3% 48.1% 27.6%
Maldonado, Martín sd 467 0 39.8% 18.2% 53.9% 27.3% 46.6% 59.2% 17.6% 34.2% 11.9%
Pereda, Jhonny ath 240 0 42.9% 6.3% 44.1% 38.1% 59.1% 62.8% 5.6% 40.4% 35.3%
Herrera, Jose ari 405 0 43.5% 0% 40.7% 15.8% 48.6% 64% 35% 47.7% 31%
Nido, Tomás det 219 0 44.3% 0% 40% 33.3% 51.2% 66.7% 28.6% 50% 19.4%
Trevino, Jose cin 647 0 41.7% 5.7% 44.4% 17.6% 46.3% 72.5% 5.4% 37.4% 24.6%
Haase, Eric mil 246 0 38.2% 17.9% 33.3% 9.5% 56.6% 58.7% 36.4% 33.3% 13.3%
Fermin, Freddy kc 570 0 42.8% 18.4% 38.3% 12.8% 60.3% 63.5% 25.8% 44.6% 23.1%
Huff, Sam sf 338 0 42.9% 11.8% 50% 18.2% 59.2% 56.5% 25.8% 46.9% 17.2%
Perez, Salvador kc 494 0 46.2% 21.1% 47.1% 10% 68.6% 51.3% 38.9% 45.5% 19.4%
Ramírez, Agustín mia 245 0 49.4% 5% 64.7% 11.1% 50.8% 65.5% 35.7% 67.2% 30%
Pozo, Yohel stl 274 0 42.3% 20% 52.1% 42.9% 55.3% 54.3% 30% 34.4% 6.7%
Torrens, Luis nym 595 0 43% 12.5% 37.3% 22.6% 52.2% 62% 22% 56.1% 19.4%
Murphy, Sean atl 629 0 41.2% 11.6% 41.4% 19% 41.2% 62.8% 36.4% 47% 22.7%
Garver, Mitch sea 272 0 35.7% 10.5% 25.9% 22.2% 44.9% 52.6% 28.6% 38.2% 10%
Fortes, Nick mia 297 0 43.4% 16.1% 41.7% 20% 60.5% 63.3% 27.3% 48.6% 8%
Pagés, Pedro stl 730 0 45.1% 24.1% 39.8% 12.5% 53.6% 63.2% 26.9% 56.5% 26.4%
Rortvedt, Ben tb 431 0 38.1% 0% 32.4% 24.1% 29.8% 64.7% 20% 53.5% 16.9%
Heineman, Tyler tor 244 0 47.5% 23.1% 47.1% 22.2% 48.1% 70.8% 29.4% 54.5% 27.8%
Vázquez, Christian min 447 0 39.1% 25% 41.1% 21.2% 54% 51.4% 23.8% 41.1% 12.2%
Barnes, Austin la 323 0 49.8% 0% 42.6% 8.3% 55.3% 68.8% 21.7% 69.1% 38.2%
Sánchez, Gary bal 264 0 41.7% 11.8% 38.2% 6.3% 72.1% 54.5% 0% 57.7% 8.6%
Stallings, Jacob col 465 0 43.9% 13.8% 47.5% 9.1% 55.4% 58.7% 53.3% 40.7% 14%
Amaya, Miguel chc 576 -1 41.3% 10.8% 34.1% 25.6% 50.8% 66.1% 13.3% 48.6% 4.8%
Davis, Henry pit 289 -1 38.1% 5.6% 33.3% 14.3% 37.9% 59.3% 17.9% 50.9% 24.3%
Diaz, Yainer hou 766 -1 37.3% 20.7% 36.5% 12.1% 49% 53.7% 20.3% 42.8% 12%
Kelly, Carson chc 624 -1 39.6% 13.3% 46.6% 21.7% 51.3% 55.9% 4% 42.5% 16.7%
Hicks, Liam mia 638 -1 40.4% 16.3% 45.3% 19% 42.6% 59.1% 20% 48.5% 23.1%
Wynns, Austin cin 318 -1 36.8% 14.3% 39% 26.7% 29.8% 66.7% 33.3% 34.5% 12.5%
Bart, Joey pit 710 -1 42.4% 5.8% 35.2% 22.6% 53.9% 65.9% 32.3% 46.2% 17.5%
Quero, Edgar cws 342 -1 34.5% 0% 41.7% 12.5% 41.5% 52.1% 23.5% 41.4% 11.8%
Alvarez, Francisco nym 293 -1 37.2% 18.5% 36.7% 0% 45.8% 64.4% 23.8% 36.7% 12.9%
Jeffers, Ryan min 636 -1 41% 21.8% 48.4% 9.1% 50.8% 54.9% 37.8% 44.9% 14.1%
Thaiss, Matt cws 515 -1 36.1% 14.6% 25.7% 13.6% 54% 57.3% 17.9% 43.5% 7.9%
Goodman, Hunter col 526 -1 40.7% 15.8% 42.9% 20% 51.7% 58.4% 16.3% 44% 22%
Realmuto, J.T. phi 961 -2 42.4% 22% 44.1% 13.5% 58.9% 52.3% 15.5% 47.9% 16.4%
Smith, Will la 809 -2 41.7% 7% 30.8% 17.2% 56.8% 51.6% 23.4% 53.3% 19.5%
O'Hoppe, Logan ana 735 -2 40% 22.9% 49.5% 14.6% 51% 57.6% 18.9% 36% 16.7%
Díaz, Elias sd 547 -2 39.9% 25.5% 37.1% 25% 61.1% 56.6% 40.7% 31.5% 10.5%
Jansen, Danny tb 603 -2 36.2% 9.4% 38.1% 8.8% 52.5% 56.6% 31.8% 34.8% 21.2%
Ruiz, Keibert was 994 -3 38.5% 13.8% 40.5% 17.6% 50.9% 58.3% 26.8% 42.6% 12.4%
OSZAR »