Caleb Smith
P Indianapolis Indians| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 30 | MLBARI | 45 | 13 | 114 | 4.83 | 4.79 | 24.8% | 12.0% | -0.3 | ||
| 2022 | 31 | MIX3 levels | 49 | 2 | 83 | 3.70 | 5.07 | 21.8% | 11.5% | -0.5 | K 21.5% · BB 12.6% · FIP 5.57 | |
| 2023 | 32 | AAAPIT | 10 | 9 | 45 | 6.40 | 4.97 | 19.1% | 11.6% | — | K 16.4% · BB 10.4% · FIP 4.97 | |
| 2024 | 33 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2025 | 34 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2026 | 35 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
Statcast · Contract
Contract
No contract data on file. Pre-MLB players and minor-league free agents do not yet have salary projections — entries are added at first 40-man roster placement.
Career Stats + Projections
Methodology▸ how WAR & MLE are computed
Stats are park-neutral MLB equivalents. The "TEAM" column shows current org affiliation only — we do NOT project at that team's park.
Rates (K%, BB%, HR-BF) are park-stripped; MiLB stat lines are translated to their MLB-equivalent via per-level MLE factors.
WAR is computed from projected runs prevented vs a replacement pitcher (the marginal arm a team would call up if this pitcher were unavailable) — calibrated to the standard WAR scale.
| Year | Age | Lvl | Team | G | GS | IP | BF | K | BB | HR | GS% | IP/G | K% | BB% | K-BB% | HR% | ERA | FIP | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ Career — actual stats, one row per year (as recorded, no adjustments) | |||||||||||||||||||
| ▸ Career — adjusted (each season translated to a park/league-neutral MLB-equivalent line; levels combined per year) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2015 | 24 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 26 | 25 | 135 | 576 | 96 | 56 | 8 | 96% | 5.2 | 13.5% | 10.1% | 3.3% | 1.3% | 3.47 | 3.97 | — |
| 2015 | 24 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 26 | 25 | 135 | 576 | 96 | 56 | 8 | 96% | 5.2 | 16.7% | 9.7% | 6.9% | 1.4% | 3.47 | 3.69 | — |
| 2016 | 25 | AA MLE | Trenton Thunder | 27 | 7 | 64 | 279 | 70 | 20 | 4 | 26% | 2.4 | 20.3% | 7.9% | 12.4% | 1.7% | 3.96 | 3.31 | — |
| 2016 | 25 | AA RAW | Trenton Thunder | 27 | 7 | 64 | 279 | 70 | 20 | 4 | 26% | 2.4 | 25.1% | 7.2% | 17.9% | 1.4% | 3.96 | 2.66 | — |
| 2017 | 26 | MIX MLE | 3 levels | 28 | 19 | 119 | 491 | 120 | 39 | 12 | 68% | 4.3 | 21.5% | 8.0% | 13.5% | 2.1% | 3.24 | 3.43 | +2.9 |
| 2017 | 26 | MIX RAW | 3 levels | 28 | 19 | 119 | 491 | 120 | 39 | 12 | 68% | 4.3 | 24.4% | 7.9% | 16.5% | 2.4% | 3.24 | 3.38 | +2.9 |
| 2018 | 27 | MLB MLE | Miami Marlins | 16 | 16 | 77 | 326 | 88 | 31 | 10 | 100% | 4.8 | 27.0% | 9.5% | 17.5% | 3.2% | 4.19 | 3.80 | +1.5 |
| 2018 | 27 | MLB RAW | Miami Marlins | 16 | 16 | 77 | 326 | 88 | 31 | 10 | 100% | 4.8 | 27.0% | 9.5% | 17.5% | 3.1% | 4.19 | 3.71 | +1.6 |
| 2019 | 28 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 30 | 30 | 163 | 684 | 187 | 60 | 37 | 100% | 5.4 | 26.0% | 9.0% | 17.0% | 5.4% | 4.59 | 4.99 | +0.8 |
| 2019 | 28 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 30 | 30 | 163 | 684 | 187 | 60 | 37 | 100% | 5.4 | 27.3% | 8.8% | 18.6% | 5.4% | 4.59 | 4.86 | +1.0 |
| 2020 | 29 | MLB MLE | Arizona Diamondbacks | 5 | 4 | 14 | 60 | 15 | 12 | 3 | 80% | 2.8 | 25.0% | 20.0% | 5.0% | 5.3% | 2.57 | 6.43 | -0.2 |
| 2020 | 29 | MLB RAW | Arizona Diamondbacks | 5 | 4 | 14 | 60 | 15 | 12 | 3 | 80% | 2.8 | 25.0% | 20.0% | 5.0% | 5.0% | 2.57 | 6.31 | -0.1 |
| 2021 | 30 | MLB MLE | Arizona Diamondbacks | 45 | 13 | 114 | 500 | 124 | 60 | 20 | 29% | 2.5 | 24.8% | 12.0% | 12.8% | 4.2% | 4.83 | 4.85 | -0.4 |
| 2021 | 30 | MLB RAW | Arizona Diamondbacks | 45 | 13 | 114 | 500 | 124 | 60 | 20 | 29% | 2.5 | 24.8% | 12.0% | 12.8% | 4.0% | 4.83 | 4.79 | -0.3 |
| 2022 | 31 | MIX MLE | 3 levels | 49 | 2 | 83 | 349 | 76 | 40 | 15 | 4% | 1.7 | 21.5% | 12.6% | 8.9% | 4.9% | 3.70 | 5.57 | -1.0 |
| 2022 | 31 | MIX RAW | 3 levels | 49 | 2 | 83 | 349 | 76 | 40 | 15 | 4% | 1.7 | 21.8% | 11.5% | 10.3% | 4.3% | 3.70 | 5.07 | -0.5 |
| 2023 | 32 | AAA MLE | Indianapolis Indians | 10 | 9 | 45 | 199 | 38 | 23 | 7 | 90% | 4.5 | 16.4% | 10.4% | 6.0% | 3.5% | 6.40 | 4.97 | — |
| 2023 | 32 | AAA RAW | Indianapolis Indians | 10 | 9 | 45 | 199 | 38 | 23 | 7 | 90% | 4.5 | 19.1% | 11.6% | 7.5% | 3.5% | 6.40 | 4.97 | — |
| ▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| MLB Career | — | 147 | 64 | 447 | 1920 | 478 | 208 | 84 | 44% | 3.0 | 24.9% | 10.8% | 14.1% | 4.4% | 4.55 | 4.80 | -1.3 | ||
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 147 | 64 | 447 | 1920 | 478 | 208 | 84 | 44% | 3.0 | 24.9% | 10.8% | 14.1% | 4.4% | 4.55 | 4.77 | -1.2 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 66 | 29 | 200 | 859 | 214 | 93 | 38 | 44% | 3.0 | 24.9% | 10.8% | 14.1% | 4.4% | 4.55 | 4.77 | -0.5 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 236 | 125 | 813 | 3464 | 753 | 349 | 118 | 53% | 3.4 | 21.7% | 10.1% | 11.7% | 3.4% | 4.13 | 4.41 | +3.1 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 58 | 31 | 200 | 852 | 185 | 86 | 29 | 53% | 3.4 | 21.7% | 10.1% | 11.7% | 3.4% | 4.13 | 4.41 | +1.4 | |
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.
2023 AAAIndianapolis Indians · 45 IPFIP 4.88 → 4.97 (+0.09)K% 19.1% → 16.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 19.10% | — | ×0.860 | 16.42% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 11.56% | — | ×0.900 | 10.40% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.52% | ÷1.095 | ×1.100 | 3.53% |
Factors used: pitcher AAA level factors (Triple-A 2023+ robo-zone set: walks improve on promotion) — K ×0.86, BB ×0.90, HR ×1.10. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 119).
Result: FIP 4.88 → 4.97, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).
2022 AAAReno Aces · 10 IPFIP 3.10 → 3.57 (+0.47)K% 22.9% → 20.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 22.86% | — | ×0.880 | 20.11% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 2.86% | — | ×1.050 | 3.00% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.86% | ÷0.965 | ×1.100 | 3.26% |
Factors used: pitcher AAA level factors — K ×0.88, BB ×1.05, HR ×1.10. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 93).
Result: FIP 3.10 → 3.57, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).
2019 AAJacksonville Jumbo Shrimp · 9 IPFIP 5.32 → 7.96 (+2.64)K% 50.0% → 40.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 50.00% | — | ×0.810 | 40.50% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 5.26% | — | ×1.100 | 5.79% |
| HR / BF /BF | 10.53% | ÷0.918 | ×1.200 | 13.75% |
Factors used: pitcher AA level factors — K ×0.81, BB ×1.10, HR ×1.20. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 84).
Result: FIP 5.32 → 7.96, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).
2017 AAAScranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders · 98 IPFIP 2.90 → 3.08 (+0.18)K% 24.6% → 21.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 24.62% | — | ×0.880 | 21.66% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 7.11% | — | ×1.050 | 7.46% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.78% | ÷1.247 | ×1.100 | 1.57% |
Factors used: pitcher AAA level factors — K ×0.88, BB ×1.05, HR ×1.10. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 149).
Result: FIP 2.90 → 3.08, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).
2016 AATrenton Thunder · 64 IPFIP 2.68 → 3.31 (+0.64)K% 25.1% → 20.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 25.09% | — | ×0.810 | 20.32% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 7.17% | — | ×1.100 | 7.89% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.43% | ÷1.015 | ×1.200 | 1.69% |
Factors used: pitcher AA level factors — K ×0.81, BB ×1.10, HR ×1.20. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 103).
Result: FIP 2.68 → 3.31, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).
2015 AATrenton Thunder · 131 IPFIP 3.56 → 3.97 (+0.41)K% 16.6% → 13.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 16.64% | — | ×0.810 | 13.48% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.22% | — | ×1.100 | 10.14% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.27% | ÷1.153 | ×1.200 | 1.32% |
Factors used: pitcher AA level factors — K ×0.81, BB ×1.10, HR ×1.20. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 131).
Result: FIP 3.56 → 3.97, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).
2015 AAAScranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders · 4 IPFIP 6.77 → 7.69 (+0.92)K% 17.4% → 15.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 17.39% | — | ×0.880 | 15.30% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 21.74% | — | ×1.050 | 22.83% |
| HR / BF /BF | 4.35% | ÷0.878 | ×1.100 | 5.45% |
Factors used: pitcher AAA level factors — K ×0.88, BB ×1.05, HR ×1.10. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 76).
Result: FIP 6.77 → 7.69, computed from the rates in the table with the same formula before and after. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression is applied when seasons are blended into a projection (how).