Did Maddon have a point on strike zone?
UPDATE, 3:43: Maddon said today he stuck by his comments of Friday night, that he didn't know (or seem to be concerned) if he would be fined for what he said, and that he didn't but into any conspriracy theories about the umpiring:
"I said what I said yesterday and I meant everything that I did say, and staying consistent with what I've said, I've talked about the present tense and staying in the moment, and that's about today. So that was yesterday's game."
On being disciplined: "I have no idea. I guess I'll find out soon enough.''
On a conspiracy theory that the umpires are biased becaused MLB prefers the Red Sox than the Rays to advance: "Never. I'd never believe that. No. No. I'm not a conspiracy theorist anyway. I said what I thought from yesterday, it's time to move on till today. I don't live my life that way. ... I've never ever ever even formulated that thought personally, I can't go there.''
DEVELOPING: Did Rays manager Joe Maddon have a point last night in his comments that the strike zone was "egregious" and "one-sided?"
Here is a graphic of umpire Hunter Wendelstedt's work as charted with pitchFX data by BrooksBaseball.net.
The key to look for are the red squares, which are pitches thrown by Boston pitchers that were outside the zone but called strikes. The green squares are pitches thrown by Boston that were called balls. The red triangles are pitches thrown by the Rays that were called strikes (and there don't appear ot be any outside the zonbe), the green triangles balls.
By a rough count, there are a half dozen pitches Maddon had a point with - especially the red square furthest to the right, which was the pitch B.J. Upton was called out on in the fifth.