Ryan Kalish

PosCF

B/TL/L

Born1988-03-28

Age (2027)39

No MLB projection yet. Career stats below are historical.

Overview

INTLLAST SEASON 2017

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	PA	AVG/OBP/SLG	SB	wRC+	WAR	MLE AVG/OBP/SLG
2015	27	INTLCriollos de C…	78	.145/.234/.159	2	16	—
2016	28	AAACHC	70	.368/.478/.509	3	137	—	.333/.420/.467
2017	29	INTLGigantes de C…	78	.116/.197/.130	0	-5	—

Contract

No contract data on file.

Career Stats + Projections

Real MLB stats plus park-adjusted projections — this season (so far / rest / full), then future seasons and career totals.

show model inputsbasis chips: RAW = as recorded · CTX = with park/league context · A+C = actual + context combined · MLE = level/park-neutral

Methodology▸ how these numbers are built

All seasons translated to park-neutral MLB-equivalent (MLE) and combined per year. 2027 = full-season projection (no games played yet). 2028+ via Advanced Marcel + aging curve.

Year	Age	Lvl	Team	MLB%	PA	AB	H	2B	3B	HR	BB	SO	HBP	SB	CS	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	ISO	BABIP	K%	BB%	wOBA	wRC+	BAT	RUN	FLD	POS	REP	WAR
▸ Career — actual stats, one row per stint (as recorded, no adjustments)
2006	18	ROK	GCL Red Sox	—	21	20	6	2	0	1	1	2	0	0	0	300	333	550	883	250	294	10	5	384	77	—	—	—	—	—	—
2008	20	A+	Lancaster JetHawks	—	82	73	17	6	0	2	8	23	0	1	0	233	309	397	706	164	306	28	10	312	59	—	—	—	—	—	—
2008	20	A	Greenville Drive	—	420	360	101	16	1	3	53	76	4	18	4	281	379	356	734	75	345	18	13	337	82	—	—	—	—	—	—
2009	21	AA	Portland Sea Dogs	—	437	391	106	19	4	13	42	87	1	14	3	271	343	440	783	169	316	20	10	346	90	—	—	—	—	—	—
2009	21	A+	Salem Red Sox	—	143	115	35	5	2	5	26	20	1	7	3	304	437	513	950	209	330	14	18	418	130	—	—	—	—	—	—
2010	22	MLB	Boston Red Sox	—	179	163	41	11	1	4	12	38	1	10	1	252	307	405	712	153	303	21	7	312	91	-2	+2	-1	+2	+4	0.5
2010	22	AAA	Pawtucket Red Sox	—	160	143	42	9	1	5	14	32	1	12	2	294	361	476	836	182	343	20	9	366	112	—	—	—	—	—	—
2010	22	AA	Portland Sea Dogs	—	183	150	44	9	1	8	28	21	2	13	1	293	411	527	938	233	290	11	15	406	126	—	—	—	—	—	—
2011	23	AAA	Pawtucket Red Sox	—	96	86	18	6	0	0	8	20	0	4	3	209	277	279	556	70	265	21	8	252	35	—	—	—	—	—	—
2012	24	MLB	Boston Red Sox	—	103	96	22	3	0	0	6	26	0	3	2	229	275	260	535	31	310	25	6	245	47	-6	-0	-6	+1	+2	-1.0
2012	24	AAA	Pawtucket Red Sox	—	126	111	29	5	0	4	13	30	0	7	2	261	339	414	753	153	321	24	10	333	77	—	—	—	—	—	—
2014	26	MLB	Chicago Cubs	—	130	121	30	4	4	0	8	28	0	3	2	248	295	347	642	99	323	22	6	285	70	-5	-0	-4	-5	+3	-1.1
2014	26	AAA	Iowa Cubs	—	319	287	72	14	3	8	28	74	2	12	4	251	322	404	726	153	312	23	9	323	53	—	—	—	—	—	—
2015	27	INTL	Criollos de Caguas	—	78	69	10	1	0	0	8	15	0	2	0	145	234	159	393	14	185	19	10	192	16	—	—	—	—	—	—
2016	28	AAA	Iowa Cubs	—	70	57	21	4	2	0	10	9	2	3	1	368	478	509	987	140	429	13	14	434	137	—	—	—	—	—	—
2017	29	INTL	Gigantes de Carolina	—	78	69	8	1	0	0	7	23	0	0	0	116	197	130	328	14	174	29	9	160	-5	—	—	—	—	—	—
▸ Career Totals (raw MLB only — historical actual)
MLB Career	—			—	412	380	93	18	5	4	26	92	1	16	5	245	295	350	645	105	311	22	6	287	80	-10	+1	-11	-2	+9	-1.3
▸ Career — adjusted (every ACTUAL line translated to park/league-neutral MLB equivalents)
2006	18	ROK MLE	GCL Red Sox	—	21	20	4	1	0	1	1	3	0	0	0	200	238	400	638	200	232	14	5	282	77	—	—	—	—	—	—
2008	20	A+ MLE	Lancaster JetHawks	—	82	75	15	5	0	2	6	31	0	1	0	200	259	347	606	147	292	38	7	256	59	—	—	—	—	—	—
2008	20	A MLE	Greenville Drive	—	420	378	96	14	1	2	35	102	4	18	4	254	324	312	636	58	337	24	8	290	82	—	—	—	—	—	—
2009	21	AA MLE	Portland Sea Dogs	—	437	402	100	17	4	10	31	106	1	14	3	249	304	386	690	137	308	24	7	301	90	—	—	—	—	—	—
2009	21	A+ MLE	Salem Red Sox	—	143	125	36	5	2	5	16	28	1	7	3	288	373	480	853	192	323	20	11	361	130	—	—	—	—	—	—
2010	22	MLB MLE	Boston Red Sox	—	179	163	40	10	1	4	12	38	1	10	1	245	301	393	694	147	303	21	7	303	91	-2	+2	-1	+2	+4	0.5
2010	22	AAA MLE	Pawtucket Red Sox	—	160	147	41	8	1	5	10	39	1	12	2	279	329	449	778	170	336	24	6	334	112	—	—	—	—	—	—
2010	22	AA MLE	Portland Sea Dogs	—	183	159	43	8	1	6	19	26	2	13	1	270	356	447	802	176	278	14	10	355	126	—	—	—	—	—	—
2011	23	AAA MLE	Pawtucket Red Sox	—	96	88	17	5	0	0	6	25	0	4	3	193	245	250	495	57	249	26	6	220	35	—	—	—	—	—	—
2012	24	MLB MLE	Boston Red Sox	—	103	96	22	3	0	0	6	26	0	3	2	229	275	260	535	31	310	25	6	238	47	-6	-0	-6	+1	+2	-1.0
2012	24	AAA MLE	Pawtucket Red Sox	—	126	114	27	4	0	3	10	37	0	7	2	237	298	351	649	114	315	29	8	282	77	—	—	—	—	—	—
2014	26	MLB MLE	Chicago Cubs	—	130	122	29	4	3	0	7	28	0	3	2	238	279	320	599	82	323	22	5	271	70	-5	-0	-4	-5	+3	-1.1
2014	26	AAA MLE	Iowa Cubs	—	319	299	61	10	2	7	16	96	2	12	4	204	249	321	570	117	272	30	5	246	53	—	—	—	—	—	—
2016	28	AAA MLE	Iowa Cubs	—	70	60	20	4	2	0	7	11	2	3	1	333	420	467	887	133	377	16	10	371	137	—	—	—	—	—	—
2006	18	ROK MLE	GCL Red Sox	—	21	20	4	1	0	1	1	3	0	0	0	200	238	400	638	200	188	14	5	282	77	—	—	—	—	—	—
2006	18	ROK RAW	GCL Red Sox	—	21	20	6	2	0	1	1	2	0	0	0	300	333	550	883	250	294	10	5	384	77	—	—	—	—	—	—
2008	20	A MLE	2 teams	—	502	453	111	19	1	4	41	132	4	19	4	245	313	318	631	73	333	26	8	284	79	—	—	—	—	—	—
2008	20	A RAW	2 teams	—	502	433	118	22	1	5	61	99	4	19	4	273	367	363	730	90	339	20	12	333	79	—	—	—	—	—	—
2009	21	AA MLE	2 teams	—	580	527	135	21	6	15	47	135	2	21	6	256	319	404	724	148	315	23	8	316	100	—	—	—	—	—	—
2009	21	AA RAW	2 teams	—	580	506	141	24	6	18	68	107	2	21	6	279	366	457	823	178	319	18	12	364	100	—	—	—	—	—	—
2010	22	AA MLE	3 teams	—	522	469	124	26	3	15	41	102	4	35	4	264	329	429	757	164	304	20	8	331	110	—	—	—	—	—	—
2010	22	AA RAW	3 teams	—	522	456	127	29	3	17	54	91	4	35	4	279	360	467	827	189	311	17	10	361	110	—	—	—	—	—	—
2011	23	AAA MLE	Pawtucket Red Sox	—	96	88	17	5	0	0	6	25	0	4	3	193	245	250	495	57	262	26	6	220	35	—	—	—	—	—	—
2011	23	AAA RAW	Pawtucket Red Sox	—	96	86	18	6	0	0	8	20	0	4	3	209	277	279	556	70	265	21	8	252	35	—	—	—	—	—	—
2012	24	AAA MLE	2 teams	—	229	210	49	7	0	3	16	63	0	10	4	233	288	310	597	76	315	28	7	262	64	—	—	—	—	—	—
2012	24	AAA RAW	2 teams	—	229	207	51	8	0	4	19	56	0	10	4	246	310	343	653	97	315	24	8	293	64	—	—	—	—	—	—
2014	26	AAA MLE	2 teams	—	449	421	91	14	6	7	23	124	2	15	6	216	260	328	588	112	290	28	5	253	58	—	—	—	—	—	—
2014	26	AAA RAW	2 teams	—	449	408	102	18	7	8	36	102	2	15	6	250	314	387	701	137	315	23	8	312	58	—	—	—	—	—	—
2015	27	INTL MLE	Criollos de Caguas	—	78	69	10	1	0	0	8	15	0	2	0	145	234	159	393	14	185	19	10	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
2015	27	INTL RAW	Criollos de Caguas	—	78	69	10	1	0	0	8	15	0	2	0	145	234	159	393	14	185	19	10	192	16	—	—	—	—	—	—
2016	28	AAA MLE	Iowa Cubs	—	70	60	20	4	2	0	7	11	2	3	1	333	420	467	887	133	400	16	10	371	137	—	—	—	—	—	—
2016	28	AAA RAW	Iowa Cubs	—	70	57	21	4	2	0	10	9	2	3	1	368	478	509	987	140	429	13	14	434	137	—	—	—	—	—	—
2017	29	INTL MLE	Gigantes de Carolina	—	78	69	8	1	0	0	7	23	0	0	0	116	197	130	328	14	174	29	9	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
2017	29	INTL RAW	Gigantes de Carolina	—	78	69	8	1	0	0	7	23	0	0	0	116	197	130	328	14	174	29	9	160	-5	—	—	—	—	—	—
2006	18	ROK MLE	GCL Red Sox	—	21	20	4	1	0	1	1	3	0	0	0	200	238	400	638	200	232	14	5	282	77	—	—	—	—	—	—
2008	20	A MLE	2 teams	—	502	452	111	19	1	4	41	132	4	19	4	246	313	319	632	73	330	26	8	284	79	—	—	—	—	—	—
2009	21	AA MLE	2 teams	—	580	526	135	21	6	15	47	135	2	21	6	257	319	405	724	148	312	23	8	316	100	—	—	—	—	—	—
2010	22	AA MLE	3 teams	—	522	472	124	26	3	15	41	102	4	35	4	263	329	426	755	163	304	20	8	331	110	—	—	—	—	—	—
2011	23	AAA MLE	Pawtucket Red Sox	—	96	90	17	5	0	0	6	25	0	4	3	189	245	244	489	56	249	26	6	220	35	—	—	—	—	—	—
2012	24	AAA MLE	2 teams	—	229	211	49	7	0	3	16	63	0	10	4	232	288	308	596	76	313	28	7	262	64	—	—	—	—	—	—
2014	26	AAA MLE	2 teams	—	449	421	91	14	6	7	23	124	2	15	6	216	260	328	588	112	287	28	5	253	58	—	—	—	—	—	—
2016	28	AAA MLE	Iowa Cubs	—	70	61	20	4	2	0	7	11	2	3	1	328	420	459	879	131	377	16	10	371	137	—	—	—	—	—	—
▸ Career Totals
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	A+C		—	412	380	93	18	5	4	26	92	1	16	5	245	295	350	645	105	311	22	6	287	73	-10	+1	-11	-2	+9	-1.3
/ 162G	—	A+C		—	650	600	146	28	8	6	41	145	2	25	8	243	294	347	641	103	310	22	6	287	73	-15	+2	-17	-3	+14	-2.1
Career	—	MLE		—	2625	2386	569	99	18	45	197	633	14	109	28	238	300	352	652	113	303	24	8	276	73	-10	+1	-11	-2	+9	-1.3
/ 162G	—	MLE		—	650	591	141	25	4	11	49	157	3	27	7	239	300	350	650	112	304	24	8	276	73	-15	+2	-17	-3	+14	-2.1

How the minor-league lines were translated

One row per minor-league stint. Open a row to see each step: the raw rate, the park adjustment, the league/level factor, the age adjustment (hitters) and the resulting MLE rate. Factors are the same ones listed on the MLE Factors page.

2016 AAAIowa Cubs · 70 PAwOBA .430 → .371 (−59)K% 12.9% → 16.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	GB/FB ×	Age ×	= MLE
K% /PA	12.86%	÷1.037	×1.290	—	—	15.99%
BB% (unintentional) /PA	14.29%	÷1.034	×0.710	—	×0.992	9.73%
HBP% /PA	2.86%	—	×0.980	—	×0.992	2.78%
Singles /BIP	31.25%	÷1.006	×0.900	—	×0.992	27.73%
Doubles /BIP	8.33%	÷0.927	×0.810	—	×0.992	7.22%
Triples /BIP	4.17%	÷0.945	×0.810	—	×0.992	3.54%
Home runs /BIP	0.00%	÷0.890	×0.780	—	×0.992	0.00%

Factors used: league row PCL. Park (home-season share, regressed): HR 78, 1B 101, 2B 85, 3B 89, K 107, BB 107 — applied at half strength. Age: age 28 vs a level average of 27.2 → −0.8% on BB/HBP/hit rates (0.8 yr older than average).

Result: wOBA .430 → .371; ISO .140 → .126; BABIP .429 → .377. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2014 AAAIowa Cubs · 319 PAwOBA .313 → .246 (−67)K% 23.2% → 30.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	GB/FB ×	Age ×	= MLE
K% /PA	23.20%	÷0.996	×1.290	—	—	30.04%
BB% (unintentional) /PA	8.46%	÷1.249	×0.710	—	×1.018	4.90%
HBP% /PA	0.63%	—	×0.980	—	×1.018	0.63%
Singles /BIP	22.07%	÷1.021	×0.900	×1.025	×1.018	20.30%
Doubles /BIP	6.57%	÷1.111	×0.810	×1.025	×1.018	5.00%
Triples /BIP	1.41%	÷1.150	×0.810	×1.025	×1.018	1.04%
Home runs /BIP	3.76%	÷0.929	×0.780	—	×1.018	3.21%

Factors used: league row PCL. Park (home-season share, regressed): HR 86, 1B 104, 2B 122, 3B 130, K 99, BB 150 — applied at half strength. Age: age 26 vs a level average of 27.2 → +1.8% on BB/HBP/hit rates (1.2 yr younger than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×1.025.

Result: wOBA .313 → .246; ISO .153 → .120; BABIP .312 → .272. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2012 AAAPawtucket Red Sox · 126 PAwOBA .326 → .282 (−44)K% 23.8% → 29.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	GB/FB ×	Age ×	= MLE
K% /PA	23.81%	÷0.985	×1.200	—	—	29.00%
BB% (unintentional) /PA	10.32%	÷0.974	×0.690	—	×1.048	7.66%
HBP% /PA	0.00%	—	×0.940	—	×1.048	0.00%
Singles /BIP	24.69%	÷0.975	×0.930	×1.032	×1.048	25.45%
Doubles /BIP	6.17%	÷1.031	×0.830	×1.032	×1.048	5.37%
Triples /BIP	0.00%	÷0.982	×0.970	×1.032	×1.048	0.00%
Home runs /BIP	4.94%	÷1.280	×0.840	—	×1.048	3.40%

Factors used: league row IL. Park (home-season share, regressed): HR 156, 1B 95, 2B 106, 3B 96, K 97, BB 95 — applied at half strength. Age: age 24 vs a level average of 27.2 → +4.8% on BB/HBP/hit rates (3.2 yr younger than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×1.032.

Result: wOBA .326 → .282; ISO .153 → .112; BABIP .321 → .315. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2011 AAAPawtucket Red Sox · 96 PAwOBA .251 → .220 (−30)K% 20.8% → 25.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	GB/FB ×	Age ×	= MLE
K% /PA	20.83%	÷0.971	×1.200	—	—	25.75%
BB% (unintentional) /PA	8.33%	÷0.988	×0.690	—	×1.050	6.11%
HBP% /PA	0.00%	—	×0.940	—	×1.050	0.00%
Singles /BIP	18.18%	÷1.025	×0.930	×1.017	×1.050	17.62%
Doubles /BIP	9.09%	÷1.007	×0.830	×1.017	×1.050	8.00%
Triples /BIP	0.00%	÷0.900	×0.970	×1.017	×1.050	0.00%
Home runs /BIP	0.00%	÷0.955	×0.840	—	×1.050	0.00%

Factors used: league row IL. Park (home-season share, regressed): HR 91, 1B 105, 2B 101, 3B 80, K 94, BB 98 — applied at half strength. Age: age 23 vs a level average of 27.2 → +5.0% on BB/HBP/hit rates (4.2 yr younger than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×1.017.

Result: wOBA .251 → .220; ISO .070 → .061; BABIP .265 → .249. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2010 AAPortland Sea Dogs · 183 PAwOBA .399 → .355 (−45)K% 11.5% → 14.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	GB/FB ×	Age ×	= MLE
K% /PA	11.48%	÷1.001	×1.220	—	—	13.98%
BB% (unintentional) /PA	14.21%	÷1.009	×0.700	—	×1.042	10.27%
HBP% /PA	1.09%	—	×0.850	—	×1.042	0.97%
Singles /BIP	20.16%	÷0.989	×0.970	×1.007	×1.042	20.75%
Doubles /BIP	6.98%	÷1.093	×0.860	×1.007	×1.042	5.76%
Triples /BIP	0.78%	÷1.150	×0.950	×1.007	×1.042	0.67%
Home runs /BIP	6.20%	÷1.095	×0.780	—	×1.042	4.60%

Factors used: league row EL. Park (home-season share, regressed): HR 119, 1B 98, 2B 119, 3B 130, K 100, BB 102 — applied at half strength. Age: age 22 vs a level average of 24.8 → +4.2% on BB/HBP/hit rates (2.8 yr younger than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×1.007.

Result: wOBA .399 → .355; ISO .233 → .191; BABIP .290 → .278. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2010 AAAPawtucket Red Sox · 160 PAwOBA .360 → .334 (−26)K% 20.0% → 24.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	GB/FB ×	Age ×	= MLE
K% /PA	20.00%	÷0.994	×1.200	—	—	24.13%
BB% (unintentional) /PA	8.75%	÷1.037	×0.690	—	×1.050	6.11%
HBP% /PA	0.62%	—	×0.940	—	×1.050	0.62%
Singles /BIP	24.32%	÷1.016	×0.930	×1.046	×1.050	24.45%
Doubles /BIP	8.11%	÷1.030	×0.830	×1.046	×1.050	7.17%
Triples /BIP	0.90%	÷0.900	×0.970	×1.046	×1.050	1.07%
Home runs /BIP	4.50%	÷0.898	×0.840	—	×1.050	4.42%

Factors used: league row IL. Park (home-season share, regressed): HR 80, 1B 103, 2B 106, 3B 80, K 99, BB 107 — applied at half strength. Age: age 22 vs a level average of 27.2 → +5.0% on BB/HBP/hit rates (5.2 yr younger than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×1.046.

Result: wOBA .360 → .334; ISO .182 → .175; BABIP .343 → .336. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2009 AAPortland Sea Dogs · 437 PAwOBA .339 → .301 (−38)K% 19.9% → 24.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	GB/FB ×	Age ×	= MLE
K% /PA	19.91%	÷1.000	×1.220	—	—	24.29%
BB% (unintentional) /PA	9.61%	÷1.000	×0.700	—	×1.050	7.06%
HBP% /PA	0.23%	—	×0.850	—	×1.050	0.20%
Singles /BIP	23.03%	÷1.000	×0.970	×0.988	×1.050	23.16%
Doubles /BIP	6.25%	÷1.000	×0.860	×0.988	×1.050	5.57%
Triples /BIP	1.32%	÷1.000	×0.950	×0.988	×1.050	1.30%
Home runs /BIP	4.28%	÷1.000	×0.780	—	×1.050	3.50%

Factors used: league row EL. Park (home-season share, regressed): no park row on file (treated as neutral) — applied at half strength. Age: age 21 vs a level average of 24.8 → +5.0% on BB/HBP/hit rates (3.8 yr younger than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×0.988.

Result: wOBA .339 → .301; ISO .169 → .143; BABIP .316 → .308. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

2009 A+Salem Red Sox · 143 PAwOBA .408 → .361 (−48)K% 14.0% → 19.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	GB/FB ×	Age ×	= MLE
K% /PA	13.99%	÷1.000	×1.420	—	—	19.86%
BB% (unintentional) /PA	17.48%	÷1.000	×0.630	—	×1.027	11.31%
HBP% /PA	0.70%	—	×0.860	—	×1.027	0.62%
Singles /BIP	24.21%	÷1.000	×0.940	×1.050	×1.027	24.54%
Doubles /BIP	5.26%	÷1.000	×0.830	×1.050	×1.027	4.71%
Triples /BIP	2.11%	÷1.000	×0.800	×1.050	×1.027	1.82%
Home runs /BIP	5.26%	÷1.000	×0.900	—	×1.027	4.86%

Factors used: league row CAR. Park (home-season share, regressed): no park row on file (treated as neutral) — applied at half strength. Age: age 21 vs a level average of 22.8 → +2.7% on BB/HBP/hit rates (1.8 yr younger than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×1.050.

Result: wOBA .408 → .361; ISO .209 → .195; BABIP .330 → .323. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).

Not traceable per stint: some stints lack the counting stats the component translation needs. Level-wide factors that apply instead — .