Believe It or Not, the ABS System Has Benefited the Brewers

[Matthew Trueblood]

Image courtesy of Benny Sieu-Imagn Images

Because the Milwaukee Brewers are good at practically everything, whenever they turn out not to be good at something, it's newsworthy. The team's foibles with regard to the ABS system that went into effect this season have been well-documented, because fans and media have had time to study it. Other clubs and their fan bases have to spend their time figuring out why their pitchers are always giving up home runs or why their batters are so all-or-nothing. Only when you're the best team in baseball does some difficulty with a relatively minor aspect of the sport get thrust into such a harsh spotlight.

Here's the secret, though: As much as their failures to challenge well (at bat or behind the plate) have cost them, on balance, the Brewers are probably coming out ahead from the implementation of the system. It hasn't hurt them, because all the visible miscues have obscured the invisible ways that what the team was already doing fit the slightly altered game state introduced by the system perfectly.

Let's break down the numbers. First, the bad news: no team in baseball has had more strikes called on pitches outside the zone (and uncorrected) at the plate than have the Brewers. Milwaukee hitters have absorbed 445 strikes that didn't have to be. The second-most such pitches called that way against a team is 401. Those extra strikes hurt. They're part of why a team with good bat-to-ball skills, in aggregate, struck out 22% of the time this season. There are supposed to be fewer such pitches in the game this year, because of the system in place to correct bad calls, and if it weren't for the Brewers, that would have been achieved. Last year, the number of bad called strikes against teams ranged from 324 to 439. Lop off the outlying Brewers, and this year, that range runs from 298 to 401. They're skewing the curve, all by themselves.

Ah, but there's also good news! No team in the majors has taken more called balls on pitches inside the zone, either. Brewers batters have taken 320 pitches that should (and, nowadays, could) have been called strikes, but which were called balls. Second-most in the bigs is 298. There have been more missed calls in the Brewers' favor than helping any other corps of hitters. 

Plainly, though, those numbers don't balance out. The called strikes outside the zone have cost the team 28 runs, according to Statcast. The called balls inside the zone have only gained them 20. In total, they're 8 runs in the hole because of bad calls. Don't be misled into thinking they're benefiting, in an absolute sense, from these misses.

However, there's another layer to the transformation of the game wrought by ABS, beyond the calls that are (or aren't) corrected. As part of the implementation of the system, this year, the strike zone shrunk. Remember that the range of called strikes on balls outside the zone shifted only slightly from last year to this year? Well, the range of called balls on pitches officially inside the zone changed a lot more. Last season, it ranged from 394 to 565. This season, it ranged from 221 to Milwaukee's 320. That's because what counts as in the zone has changed since last season. Last year, the percentage of pitches teams saw within the strike zone ranged from 48.8% to 51.7%. This year, that range is from 46.1% to 48.6%.

No team in baseball swings less than the Brewers. That was true in 2025, and it was true in 2026. It's their plan of attack at the plate: production via patience. A systemic shift that reduces the size of the strike zone is really, really good for a team like that. Sure, the Brewers are missing some chances to reclaim balls on pitches that were called strikes, but on balance, many of them are coming out ahead. Brice Turang has challenged less than half as often as Statcast's model would have predicted, which has cost him a couple of flipped calls. But because he's so patient on pitches around the edges of the zone, he's also benefiting from teams being reluctant to pull the trigger on their own challenges.

Statcast's expected challenge model predicts that opponents would have challenged 32 times against Turang, winning 20. Instead, they've challenged just 27 times, winning 14. It expects 19 challenges and 10 wins against Christian Yelich. In reality, opponents challenged against him 11 times, winning 3. It expects 7 wins in 13 challenges against Jackson Chourio, and opposing catchers did win 7 appeals against him—but they did it in 19 tries, rather than 13. 

Being patient pays off more handsomely as the zone gets tighter. It pays off even more, in the ABS-run league, once the other team loses a challenge or two and becomes hamstrung when it comes to getting back whatever calls you earn by being so disciplined. This is how a team with few hitters opposing pitchers truly fear walked 10.6% of the time this year. Turang and Jake Bauers became the first pair of Brewers teammates ever to draw 90 walks apiece in the same season. 

They're the perfect team for an ABS-compressed zone on the mound, too. Milwaukee maintained the second-highest Zone% this year, with their pitchers filling up even the smaller zone better than anyone save the Mariners. They could afford that (whereas other teams might not) because they had the second-highest average four-seam velocity, the fourth-highest average sinker velocity, and the fourth-highest average cutter velocity in the league.

If the zone is small, your hitters should be patient, and your pitchers had better show good control and throw hard enough to survive inside that zone. No team in the league was more antifragile than the Brewers in this regard. They look bad if you look only at the frequency and success rate of their challenges, but overall, the ABS system has been very, very good to this team—because they're built for the game it has wrought.

View full article

[sveumrules]

You left out the part where Brewers catchers had the third most challenges (254), the third most overturns (143) and the third most positive run value (+14.0) behind the plate.

Considering the Brewers 125 batter initiated reviews were the second fewest in all of MLB, it seems like focus of their challenge strategy was to mostly save them for the run prevention side. 

[bm1090]

My first takeaway was why are umps so bad during brewers games?

[Brian]

5 hours ago, bm1090 said:

My first takeaway was why are umps so bad during brewers games?

I have always thought it's because were a small market team which I believe is a bias especially in the MLB and NBA. Large-market teams attract and buy more superstars so the league benefits from that. "The theory" is that it is a financial incentive, since larger markets bring in more money even in selling merchandise, "follow the money, its always about the money". 

[Matthew Trueblood]

38 minutes ago, Brian said:

I have always thought it's because were a small market team which I believe is a bias especially in the MLB and NBA. Large-market teams attract and buy more superstars so the league benefits from that. "The theory" is that it is a financial incentive, since larger markets bring in more money even in selling merchandise, "follow the money, its always about the money". 

Guys. You're underthinking it. There are more bad calls against the Brewers because there are also more GOOD calls against them! When you swing less than any other team in baseball, the umps have to call more pitches. They'll get some wrong. It's not the numerator that changes disproportionately when the Brewers hit; it's the denominator.

[Brian]

9 minutes ago, Matthew Trueblood said:

Guys. You're underthinking it. There are more bad calls against the Brewers because there are also more GOOD calls against them! When you swing less than any other team in baseball, the umps have to call more pitches. They'll get some wrong. It's not the numerator that changes disproportionately when the Brewers hit; it's the denominator.

Sorry your 100% wrong. 18 missed calls, 13 against the Brewers. 

 

[Matthew Trueblood]

6 minutes ago, Brian said:

Sorry your 100% wrong. 18 missed calls, 13 against the Brewers. 

 

This doesn't respond to my point at all; you're still only looking at numerators.

[Brian]

1 minute ago, Matthew Trueblood said:

This doesn't respond to my point at all; you're still only looking at numerators.

I look at percentages. 

[Frisbee Slider]

3 hours ago, Brian said:

I look at percentages. 

Matt’s point makes sense. If the Brewers swung more, umpires would be less relevant. Since the Brewers take a lot of pitches, umpires are forced to call balls and strikes more often. Since umpires are human, they will make mistakes more often for and against Milwaukee.

[Playing Catch]

35 minutes ago, Frisbee Slider said:

Matt’s point makes sense. If the Brewers swung more, umpires would be less relevant. Since the Brewers take a lot of pitches, umpires are forced to call balls and strikes more often. Since umpires are human, they will make mistakes more often for and against Milwaukee.

Since umpires get most calls correct, and the Brewers force the umps to make more calls due to their passivity, the Brewers force umps to call more correct pitches for the Brewers, too.

In terms of what @Brian said, I think a home crowd is going to have a positive impact on calls for the home team. I am basing this on a decades-old SI article* on the phenomenon of home field advantage, where they showed data that demonstrated that home field advantage in most sports is almost entirely based on unpire/referee decisions (it may be different in baseball with the variety of ballpark dimensions). Basically the article stated that we are subconsciously wired to want people to like/agree with us and that since they are human beings, umpires/referees can't help it.

*I'd welcome any newer evidence

[bm1090]

4 hours ago, Matthew Trueblood said:

Guys. You're underthinking it. There are more bad calls against the Brewers because there are also more GOOD calls against them! When you swing less than any other team in baseball, the umps have to call more pitches. They'll get some wrong. It's not the numerator that changes disproportionately when the Brewers hit; it's the denominator.

You’re probably right, and I was saying it in jest. And I have no concern that umps are biased against the brewers .

[titanrick]

I still would love for them to go full ABS and do away with all the missed calls.  No one would even notice a difference because the ump gets instant feedback in an earpiece and just calls every pitch correct the first time.

But I fear that "baseball" is infatuated with the strategy aspect of this current system and it will probably be years before they go full ABS.

[Playing Catch]

1 hour ago, titanrick said:

No one would even notice a difference

I think that over the course of a few seasons, the players would adjust how they play due to the "perfect" zone, and that it would have unforseen impact on how the game is enjoyed by fans. For that reason, I'm in no hurry to change this current system.

Additionally, I have wondered about the "why" behind many challenges. We know that there's a big difference, statistically, changing the count from 1-1 to 0-2 or vice versa. But based on my observations, I think batters should only challenge calls at the top of the zone (their best vantage-point, and one of two parts of the zone that has been curated especially for them). I also think catchers, specifically the Brewers catchers, will --- at times --- challenge a pitch because they want the umpire to see where a specific pitch landed. We know the old adage, "So-and-so needs that pitch to be successful in this game." I think that on close pitches, especially breaking balls down, and at the edges of the zone, catchers want to give a sense to the umpire just how close those pitches are.

Or perhaps the scouting report on a specific umpire tells the catchers which parts of the zone the ump struggles with the most, and they are asked to be aggressive on certain challenges or pitches.

Anyway, long story longer, I think that there are more motivations to deciding to challenge than we realize, and that distilling the decision down to "good:bad::strike:ball" is much too simplistic.

[titanrick]

12 minutes ago, Playing Catch said:

I think that over the course of a few seasons, the players would adjust how they play due to the "perfect" zone, and that it would have unforseen impact on how the game is enjoyed by fans. For that reason, I'm in no hurry to change this current system.

I'm curious what you mean by a negative unforeseen impact on how the game is enjoyed.

[Playing Catch]

2 hours ago, titanrick said:

I'm curious what you mean by a negative unforeseen impact on how the game is enjoyed.

I guess the same way we saw the 3TO and launch angle era change how the game was played, which itself was response to extreme shifts and a generation of small ballparks, among other factors.

What is the saying about such things? Something like, when the measure becomes the goal, [you get unintended consequences], or something like that?

 

[Local Man Brewer Fan]

I really appreciate the analysis that went in to this article. And frankly, having fans divided on whether they agree with what is being positioned is great. 

I know it has been stated before, but having a pitch challenge reconciled on the jumbo-tron in less than 5 seconds is excellent - and I believe the strategy around how to best use the limited number of challenges adds to the game.

It will be interesting to see how the number of challenges changes in the post season. I do believe you will generally have veteran umpires calling those games, but you will also have pitchers who consistently work the edges as well.

Matthew, thank you for making me think, and learn.

[CheezWizHed]

So you presented the offensive impact, but didn't present how it impacted our pitchers.  

But ABS challenges are a transitional trifle... Time to just go to the ABS system calling balls and strikes.  People trust it more than umpires already. 

You presented that we would've gained 8 runs on offense with automatic balls and strike calls... what would've been the impact to our pitchers?

[LouisEly]

On 9/29/2026 at 5:33 AM, Matthew Trueblood said:

Guys. You're underthinking it. There are more bad calls against the Brewers because there are also more GOOD calls against them! When you swing less than any other team in baseball, the umps have to call more pitches. They'll get some wrong. It's not the numerator that changes disproportionately when the Brewers hit; it's the denominator.

I interpreted the comment about umps being bad because they were wrong on pitches outside of the zone more than any other team and they were wrong about pitches inside of the zone more than any other team, so if you add them up, they had to have had the most total wrong calls (whether they were in the Brewers favor or not) vs the Brewers than any other team.

Thus, "why are the umps so bad" with "bad" = "wrong".

[SeaBass]

I'm pretty definitively against going to full ABS. I'm good with the current system. Everyone loves to bag on the umpires, myself included, but for the most part they're really good at what they do. The teams now have a way to mitigate some incorrect calls. I think as fans we just overthink it all, especially because the televised broadcasts show us the box zone.

Why have we suddenly become "we must have 100% accuracy" robots? Want to watch robots? I'm sure that might happen some day. In the meantime, while watching humans play I'm more than content to have human officials making most of the calls.

[CheezWizHed]

1 hour ago, SeaBass said:

I'm pretty definitively against going to full ABS. I'm good with the current system. Everyone loves to bag on the umpires, myself included, but for the most part they're really good at what they do. The teams now have a way to mitigate some incorrect calls. I think as fans we just overthink it all, especially because the televised broadcasts show us the box zone.

Why have we suddenly become "we must have 100% accuracy" robots? Want to watch robots? I'm sure that might happen some day. In the meantime, while watching humans play I'm more than content to have human officials making most of the calls.

Not sure how we got to "watching robots".... but that would be cool.

But seriously... while Matt tried to show how the ABS challenge system helped the Brewers, my only take away was that we had more bad calls against us then for us.  Why would I want to watch Umps make bad calls?  

I'll admit that I've been impressed by most Ump's abilities to be so detailed on the strike zone, but certain Ump just have bad days... do you really want an Ump with a bad day to ruin a World Series run for the Brewers?  At least Angel Hernandez isn't in the mix anymore... 

Assuming that the ABS system can have immediate ball and strike calls... I'll be happy to give up on the ump calling them.  Then he doesn't need to be back there risking a foul tip off the mask either. 

[SeaBass]

3 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

Not sure how we got to "watching robots".... but that would be cool.

But seriously... while Matt tried to show how the ABS challenge system helped the Brewers, my only take away was that we had more bad calls against us then for us.  Why would I want to watch Umps make bad calls?  

I'll admit that I've been impressed by most Ump's abilities to be so detailed on the strike zone, but certain Ump just have bad days... do you really want an Ump with a bad day to ruin a World Series run for the Brewers?  At least Angel Hernandez isn't in the mix anymore... 

Assuming that the ABS system can have immediate ball and strike calls... I'll be happy to give up on the ump calling them.  Then he doesn't need to be back there risking a foul tip off the mask either. 

Well, balls and strikes are only one responsibility of the home plate umpire so I don't think they're ever going away. There's still HBP and catcher's interference calls, I don't think they'll meaningfully be able to stand much further away from the catcher than they do now.

My main point is we are all baseball fans and have not once watched a game where the human element was removed. In watching games this season with the ABS in place it's actually impressed me how inconsequential most wrong ball or strike calls are. The Brewers have exhausted their challenges early several times and survived just fine.

I just don't like the idea that suddenly after decades of watching human based strike zones some fans have wandered into the territory of zero tolerance for a missed call. This game is all about human error, allowing the umpires to be human right along with the players shouldn't be a dealbreaker. And as stated, there now exists a way to mitigate those bad calls. I think with the challenge system we can still enjoy the game we've always enjoyed and there's a means to get out of a truly bad call at a really bad moment if teams use their challenges wisely. Most moments where missed balls and strikes occur truly aren't that crucial to the end result.

[CheezWizHed]

49 minutes ago, SeaBass said:

I just don't like the idea that suddenly after decades of watching human based strike zones some fans have wandered into the territory of zero tolerance for a missed call. This game is all about human error, allowing the umpires to be human right along with the players shouldn't be a dealbreaker. And as stated, there now exists a way to mitigate those bad calls. I think with the challenge system we can still enjoy the game we've always enjoyed and there's a means to get out of a truly bad call at a really bad moment if teams use their challenges wisely. Most moments where missed balls and strikes occur truly aren't that crucial to the end result.

Watching the Ump call balls and strikes is one of the more frustrating parts of baseball (especially Hernandez). The umps aren't part of the game - they are simply meant to be judges.  

I'll admit that I do miss the Bill Martin temper tantrums, the nose-to-nose arguments with the umps, and the kicking of sand at each other... but that is already been eliminated in today's game anyway.  There is going to be a whole generation of baseball fans that won't understand The Naked Gun baseball scene at all...

The best an Ump can do be is be invisible to a game - he doesn't add any value.  But he can certainly take away value. If we can have a better way to allow the two teams compete fairly, then I'm all for it.

[titanrick]

9 hours ago, SeaBass said:

Want to watch robots? I'm sure that might happen some day. In the meantime, while watching humans play I'm more than content to have human officials making most of the calls.

I'm not sure if you're being serious.  The human being umpire isn't going anywhere.  He just wears an earpiece that tells him instantly if the pitch is a ball or strike.  He still makes the call so the rest of us know.  Nothing looks different to the viewer.

I agree with you that umps are generally pretty decent at it.  But if all that changes is they now call every single pitch accurately the first time, how can anyone be against that?

I've never sat down to watch a game thinking, "I can't wait to see which pitches the ump will miss tonight."  This isn't some nostalgic part of baseball - it's an annoyance that we always put up with because we had no other choice.  Now we do.

[SeaBass]

13 hours ago, titanrick said:

But if all that changes is they now call every single pitch accurately the first time, how can anyone be against that?

It seems pretty clear that MLB and the players are against it. They had the choice and seem pretty content with it. I suppose we'll see if that changes at some point in the future but I don't think it will. Unless the Yankees lose a world series because they burned all their challenges and a huge call goes against them. So there's hope?

[Playing Catch]

21 hours ago, SeaBass said:

I just don't like the idea that suddenly after decades of watching human based strike zones some fans have wandered into the territory of zero tolerance for a missed call. This game is all about human error, allowing the umpires to be human right along with the players shouldn't be a dealbreaker.

Most of us played enough to understand the tension of a two-strike count, and heard over and over, "too close to take," This has been my attitude toward missed calls against a hitter. When the hitter (a human), gives up their opportunity to swing at a close pitch, they are foregoing their first opportunity to "challenge" a pitch, allowing the umpire (another human) to make the decision for them. ABS has given hitters a "take-back," on their original decision to keep the bat on their shoulder.

I have more symptathy for pitchers that throw a strike that gets called a ball.