Cal Quantrill

P Texas Rangers

Age 32 RHP 6'3" / 195 lbs MLB peak 0.5 · 2027 ILInjured 60-Day (D60)

Overview

MLBRPIL-6040-MAN

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	29	MLBCOL	29	29	148	4.98	5.03	16.8%	10.5%	0.6
2025	30	MIX2 levels	28	28	129	5.67	4.72	17.8%	6.5%	1.0	K 16.6% · BB 6.8% · FIP 4.92
2026	31	MIX2 levels	35	18	124	3.12	3.73	18.8%	5.6%	2.5	K 18.5% · BB 5.5% · FIP 3.69
2027PROJ	32	MLBTEX	8	8	48	4.66	4.57	17.7%	6.6%	0.5
2028PROJ	33	MLBTEX	10	10	62	4.77	4.85	16.9%	7.1%	0.4
2029PROJ	34	MLBTEX	7	7	43	5.00	5.15	16.0%	7.6%	0.1

Last 3 seasons WAR 4.1 · Next 3 projected WAR 1.0Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Skills · percentileStatcast 2026

xwOBA vs59

FB Velo40

K%23

Form2.73 ERA (proj 4.66) · K 21.9% (proj 17.7%) · BB 3.1% (proj 6.6%) ▲▲ last 60d · 26 IP through Oct 27

CompsMiguel González (age 32) · Elmer Dessens (age 32) · Rolando Arrojo (age 32)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 113105vR 97

ERA4.66

FIP4.57

K%17.7%

BB%6.6%

K-BB%11.1%

Proj IP48

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 48 IP

Statcast · Contract

Statcast Percentiles

FB Velo

p4093.8

Whiff%

p1019.6%

p2318.3%

xwOBA vs

p590.303

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

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 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)
▸ Model inputs — neutral MLE (past 3 seasons + 2027 so far)
2016	21	MIX MLE	2 levels	7	7	18	84	18	6	1	100%	2.6	19.4%	4.5%	15.0%	0.0%	8.35	2.02	—
2016	21	MIX RAW	2 levels	7	7	18	84	18	6	1	100%	2.6	21.4%	7.1%	14.3%	1.2%	8.35	2.83	—
2017	22	MIX MLE	2 levels	22	22	116	509	110	40	10	100%	5.3	16.9%	8.9%	8.0%	2.6%	3.80	4.22	—
2017	22	MIX RAW	2 levels	22	22	116	509	110	40	10	100%	5.3	21.6%	7.9%	13.8%	2.0%	3.80	3.36	—
2018	23	MIX MLE	2 levels	28	28	148	659	123	42	16	100%	5.3	15.4%	7.0%	8.4%	3.3%	4.80	4.49	—
2018	23	MIX RAW	2 levels	28	28	148	659	123	42	16	100%	5.3	18.7%	6.4%	12.3%	2.4%	4.80	3.69	—
2019	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	30	25	139	601	122	37	18	83%	4.6	19.6%	6.2%	13.4%	3.0%	5.00	3.89	+2.5
2019	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	30	25	139	601	122	37	18	83%	4.6	20.3%	6.2%	14.1%	3.0%	5.00	3.83	+2.6
2020	25	MLB MLE	Cleveland Indians	18	3	32	135	31	7	4	17%	1.8	23.0%	5.2%	17.8%	3.0%	2.25	3.45	+0.4
2020	25	MLB RAW	Cleveland Indians	18	3	32	135	31	7	4	17%	1.8	23.0%	5.2%	17.8%	3.0%	2.25	3.44	+0.4
2021	26	MLB MLE	Cleveland Indians	40	22	150	616	121	47	16	55%	3.7	19.6%	7.6%	12.0%	2.6%	2.89	3.84	+2.8
2021	26	MLB RAW	Cleveland Indians	40	22	150	616	121	47	16	55%	3.7	19.6%	7.6%	12.0%	2.6%	2.89	3.81	+2.8
2022	27	MLB MLE	Cleveland Guardians	32	32	186	770	128	47	21	100%	5.8	16.6%	6.1%	10.5%	2.7%	3.38	3.97	+3.2
2022	27	MLB RAW	Cleveland Guardians	32	32	186	770	128	47	21	100%	5.8	16.6%	6.1%	10.5%	2.7%	3.38	3.95	+3.2
2023	28	MIX MLE	3 levels	24	24	122	544	75	44	15	100%	5.1	13.1%	8.1%	5.0%	2.8%	5.37	4.55	+1.2
2023	28	MIX RAW	3 levels	24	24	122	544	75	44	15	100%	5.1	13.8%	8.1%	5.7%	2.8%	5.37	4.55	+1.2
2024	29	MLB MLE	Colorado Rockies	29	29	148	656	110	69	23	100%	5.1	16.8%	10.5%	6.3%	3.1%	4.98	4.72	+1.2
2024	29	MLB MLE	Colorado Rockies	29	29	148	656	110	69	23	100%	5.1	16.8%	10.5%	6.3%	3.1%	4.98	4.72	+1.2
2024	29	MLB RAW	Colorado Rockies	29	29	148	656	110	69	23	100%	5.1	16.8%	10.5%	6.3%	3.5%	4.98	5.03	+0.6
2025	30	MIX MLE	2 levels	28	28	129	555	99	36	23	100%	4.6	16.6%	6.8%	9.7%	4.3%	5.67	4.92	+0.7
2025	30	MIX MLE	2 levels	28	28	129	555	99	36	23	100%	4.6	16.6%	6.8%	9.7%	4.3%	5.67	4.92	+0.7
2025	30	MIX RAW	2 levels	28	28	129	555	99	36	23	100%	4.6	17.8%	6.5%	11.4%	4.1%	5.67	4.72	+1.0
2026	31	MIX MLE	2 levels	35	18	124	499	94	28	14	51%	3.5	18.5%	5.5%	12.9%	2.6%	3.12	3.69	+2.5
2026	31	MIX MLE	2 levels	35	18	124	499	94	28	14	51%	3.5	18.5%	5.5%	12.9%	2.6%	3.12	3.69	+2.5
2026	31	MIX RAW	2 levels	35	18	124	499	94	28	14	51%	3.5	18.8%	5.6%	13.2%	2.8%	3.12	3.73	+2.5
▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded)
MLB Career	—			219	164	947	4020	703	290	125	75%	4.3	17.5%	7.2%	10.3%	3.1%	4.17	4.25	+12.8
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	32	MLB	TEX	8	8	48	203	36	13	6	100%	6.0	17.7%	6.6%	11.1%	3.2%	4.66	4.57	+0.5
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	33	MLB MLE	TEX	10	10	62	261	44	18	9	100%	6.2	16.9%	7.1%	9.8%	3.5%	4.77	4.85	+0.4
2029	34	MLB MLE	TEX	7	7	43	180	29	14	7	100%	6.1	16.0%	7.6%	8.4%	3.8%	5.00	5.15	+0.1
2028	33	MLB CTX	TEX	10	10	62	262	44	19	9	100%	6.2	16.9%	7.1%	9.8%	3.5%	4.77	4.85	+0.4
2029	34	MLB CTX	TEX	7	7	43	182	29	14	7	100%	6.1	16.0%	7.6%	8.4%	3.8%	5.00	5.15	+0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		236	181	1051	4460	776	322	141	77%	4.5	17.4%	7.2%	10.2%	3.2%	4.24	4.28	+13.9
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		45	35	200	849	148	61	27	77%	4.4	17.4%	7.2%	10.2%	3.2%	4.24	4.28	+2.6
Career	—	MLE		293	238	1312	5628	967	412	167	81%	4.5	17.2%	7.3%	9.9%	3.0%	4.30	4.20	+13.3
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		45	36	200	858	147	63	25	81%	4.5	17.2%	7.3%	9.9%	3.0%	4.30	4.20	+2.5

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.

2026 AAARound Rock Express · 14 IPFIP 3.02 → 3.31 (+0.28)K% 23.2% → 20.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.21%	—	×0.860	19.96%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.14%	—	×0.900	6.43%
HR / BF /BF	1.79%	÷1.000	×1.100	1.96%

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 100).

Result: FIP 3.02 → 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).

2025 AAARound Rock Express · 11 IPFIP 1.89 → 2.52 (+0.63)K% 33.3% → 28.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	33.33%	—	×0.860	28.67%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	2.38%	—	×0.900	2.14%
HR / BF /BF	2.38%	÷0.913	×1.100	2.87%

Result: FIP 1.89 → 2.52, 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).

2023 AAAColumbus Clippers · 14 IPFIP 5.66 → 5.85 (+0.20)K% 15.2% → 13.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	15.15%	—	×0.860	13.03%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.61%	—	×0.900	9.55%
HR / BF /BF	4.55%	÷1.037	×1.100	4.82%

Result: FIP 5.66 → 5.85, 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).

2023 AAAkron RubberDucks · 9 IPFIP 3.72 → 4.64 (+0.92)K% 20.6% → 16.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.59%	—	×0.810	16.68%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	5.88%	—	×1.100	6.47%
HR / BF /BF	2.94%	÷0.909	×1.200	3.88%

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 82).

Result: FIP 3.72 → 4.64, 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 AAAEl Paso Chihuahuas · 36 IPFIP 3.26 → 3.68 (+0.42)K% 20.9% → 18.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.89%	—	×0.880	18.38%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	6.96%	—	×1.050	7.31%
HR / BF /BF	1.90%	÷0.950	×1.100	2.20%

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 90).

Result: FIP 3.26 → 3.68, 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).

2018 AASan Antonio Missions · 117 IPFIP 3.63 → 4.60 (+0.98)K% 19.3% → 15.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.35%	—	×0.810	15.67%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.09%	—	×1.100	7.80%
HR / BF /BF	2.30%	÷0.824	×1.200	3.35%

Result: FIP 3.63 → 4.60, 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).

2018 AAAEl Paso Chihuahuas · 31 IPFIP 3.81 → 4.08 (+0.27)K% 16.1% → 14.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	16.06%	—	×0.880	14.13%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	3.65%	—	×1.050	3.83%
HR / BF /BF	2.92%	÷1.045	×1.100	3.07%

Result: FIP 3.81 → 4.08, 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).

2017 A+Lake Elsinore Storm · 74 IPFIP 2.90 → 3.82 (+0.92)K% 24.1% → 18.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.05%	—	×0.770	18.52%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.59%	—	×1.150	8.73%
HR / BF /BF	1.58%	÷0.921	×1.250	2.15%

Factors used: pitcher A+ level factors — K ×0.77, BB ×1.15, HR ×1.25. 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 2.90 → 3.82, 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).

Career Path Comps

What happened to similar pitchers from this age · Y-axis: ERA+ (100 = league avg, 150 = elite, 80 = below) · Bands: P10–P90 outer, P25–P75 inner · Gold: OGILVIE projection

			Profile at Match Age					Next 3 Yrs				Career
Comp	Age	Role	FIP	K%	BB%	HR/BF	BABIP	FIP	K%	K-BB%	IP	ΔFIP	Low FIP	IP	Match
Cal Quantrill (OGILVIE)	—	—	—	—	—	3.2%	—	4.97	16.5%	9.2%	104	+0.40	—	—	—
Miguel González R 2016 · 3.72 FIP	32	SP	3.72	17.8%	5.8%	2.5%	.295	4.71	14.1%	6.3%	168	+0.99	3.72	905	68
Elmer Dessens R 2003 · 4.25 FIP	32	SP	4.25	14.5%	6.5%	2.8%	.319	3.98	15.0%	9.6%	248	-0.27	3.55	1,167	62
Rolando Arrojo R 2000 · 4.47 FIP	32	SP	4.47	16.1%	8.0%	3.1%	.291	3.68	16.4%	9.2%	185	-0.79	3.50	700	61
Tim Adleman R 2019 · 4.30 FIP	31	SP	4.30	22.8%	7.8%	3.9%	.266	4.71	18.5%	11.1%	90	+0.41	3.63	605	61
Mike Fiers R 2017 · 5.12 FIP	32	SP	5.12	21.8%	9.2%	4.9%	.290	4.88	17.5%	11.5%	416	-0.24	2.83	1,140	61
Orlando Hernandez R 2002 · 3.78 FIP	32	SP	3.78	18.6%	5.6%	2.8%	.258	4.26	18.9%	9.8%	213	+0.48	3.35	1,315	60
Odrisamer Despaigne R 2019 · 3.77 FIP	32	SP	3.77	19.4%	8.9%	2.2%	.330	—	—	—	—	—	3.13	689	58
Miles Mikolas R 2021 · 4.27 FIP	32	SP	4.27	16.4%	5.5%	3.4%	.269	4.09	17.3%	13.0%	575	-0.18	3.13	1,386	57
Merrill Kelly R 2021 · 4.00 FIP	32	SP	4.00	19.5%	5.7%	3.3%	.297	3.80	23.4%	15.3%	452	-0.20	3.60	1,170	57
Kenshin Kawakami R 2009 · 3.97 FIP	34	SP-	3.97	15.7%	7.6%	2.2%	.277	4.06	15.1%	9.5%	87	+0.09	3.97	244	55
Yohan Pino R 2015 · 4.13 FIP	31	SP-	4.13	17.8%	5.8%	3.3%	.312	5.33	15.2%	11.6%	35	+1.20	3.84	193	55
Juan Delgadillo R 2015 · 4.54 FIP	32	SP	4.54	15.5%	7.2%	3.3%	.316	4.47	10.9%	4.7%	39	-0.07	4.47	143	55
Chuck Smith R 2001 · 3.99 FIP	31	SP	3.99	18.4%	8.1%	2.6%	.289	—	—	—	—	—	3.08	211	54
Jeremy Hefner R 2016 · 4.64 FIP	30	SP	4.64	16.8%	9.1%	3.3%	.305	—	—	—	—	—	3.56	322	54
Josh Roenicke R 2015 · 4.85 FIP	32	SP	4.85	10.9%	7.0%	3.3%	.353	3.35	19.2%	11.5%	160	-1.50	3.25	500	54
Osvaldo Fernandez R 2001 · 4.53 FIP	32	SP-	4.53	9.6%	8.2%	2.2%	.324	—	—	—	—	—	4.25	387	54
Jarrett Grube R 2015 · 3.75 FIP	33	SP	3.75	18.7%	4.2%	3.1%	.285	4.57	17.3%	9.6%	253	+0.82	3.75	393	54
Aaron Brooks R 2022 · 4.38 FIP	32	SP	4.38	15.8%	7.0%	3.1%	.332	4.45	14.2%	7.5%	245	+0.07	3.71	879	53
Matt Shoemaker R 2019 · 3.80 FIP	32	SP	3.80	22.2%	8.3%	2.8%	.181	5.06	18.8%	11.1%	159	+1.26	3.12	728	53
Elian Leyva R 2019 · 4.30 FIP	30	SP-	4.30	17.0%	8.5%	2.9%	.323	—	—	—	—	—	3.10	158	53

Career Comps

Completed MLB careers (no pro action in 2+ yrs) whose totals — actual + projected — most resemble this player's. Pool: 2,161 pitcher careers (1,251 from 1990-2025 + 910 historical, 1901-2023), also matched on career-to-date at the same age. * Historical (Lahman) careers: rates era-adjusted to 2001-24 league levels; WAR is an OGILVIE proxy.

Player	162s	IP/yr	K%	BB%	HR/9	ERA
OGILVIE CAREER PROJECTION	5.5	100	17.4%	7.3%	1.22	4.26
Willie Blair ('90-'01, 1 WAR*)	6.4	106	16.4%*	7.2%*	1.32*	4.86*
Dan Schatzeder ('77-'91, 8 WAR*)	6.6	94	18.8%*	8.5%*	1.28*	4.25*
Carlos Villanueva ('16)	5.0	91	20.4%	7.6%	1.25	4.31
Lee Stange ('61-'70, 9 WAR*)	6.1	135	17.8%*	6.6%*	1.36*	4.14*
Dustin Hermanson ('06)	6.4	128	15.9%	8.4%	1.12	4.21
Omar Daal ('03)	6.0	120	15.6%	8.5%	1.05	4.55