A.J. Minter

P Minnesota Twins

Age 33 LHP 6'0" / 215 lbs MLB peak 0.1 · 2027

Overview

MLBRP40-MAN

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	30	MIX3 levels	42	1	37	2.65	4.12	26.0%	8.2%	0.2	K 26.1% · BB 7.5% · FIP 4.30
2025	31	MLBNYM	13	0	11	1.64	1.92	31.8%	11.4%	0.3
2026	32	MIX4 levels	60	2	57	2.37	3.89	21.0%	3.5%	0.4	K 22.0% · BB 3.8% · FIP 4.36
2027PROJ	33	MLBMIN	48	0	50	3.94	4.19	22.7%	4.7%	0.2
2028PROJ	34	MLBMIN	40	0	42	4.27	4.50	21.8%	5.2%	0.0
2029PROJ	35	MLBMIN	29	0	30	4.61	4.83	20.9%	5.7%	-0.1

Last 3 seasons WAR 1.0 · Next 3 projected WAR 0.1Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Skills · percentileStatcast 2026

xwOBA vs60

K%49

FB Velo36

Form2.78 ERA (proj 3.94) · K 22.3% (proj 22.7%) · BB 6.4% (proj 4.7%) · last 90d · 23 IP through Oct 27

CompsPedro Borbón (age 33) · Hideki Okajima (age 33) · Jamie Walker (age 33)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 92100vR 108

ERA3.94

FIP4.19

K%22.7%

BB%4.7%

K-BB%18.1%

Proj IP50

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 50 IP

Grades · Statcast · Contract

Scouting Grades

STUF6060

CTRL5050

CMD6060

K†5555

Statcast Percentiles

FB Velo

p3693.5

Whiff%

p3723.4%

p4922.0%

xwOBA vs

p600.302

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	22	MIX MLE	3 levels	31	0	35	134	47	11	0	0%	1.1	33.0%	8.7%	24.4%	0.0%	1.30	1.41	—
2016	22	MIX RAW	3 levels	31	0	35	134	47	11	0	0%	1.1	35.1%	8.2%	26.9%	0.0%	1.30	1.34	—
2017	23	MIX MLE	5 levels	42	0	39	163	56	14	3	0%	0.9	31.3%	9.5%	21.7%	1.6%	3.20	2.56	+0.9
2017	23	MIX RAW	5 levels	42	0	39	163	56	14	3	0%	0.9	34.4%	8.6%	25.8%	1.8%	3.20	2.31	+1.1
2018	24	MLB MLE	Atlanta Braves	65	0	61	260	69	21	3	0%	0.9	26.5%	8.1%	18.5%	1.2%	3.23	2.52	+1.5
2018	24	MLB RAW	Atlanta Braves	65	0	61	260	69	21	3	0%	0.9	26.5%	8.1%	18.5%	1.2%	3.23	2.51	+1.5
2019	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	56	0	52	241	65	21	7	0%	0.9	25.5%	8.8%	16.7%	3.3%	5.54	3.86	+0.4
2019	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	56	0	52	241	65	21	7	0%	0.9	27.0%	8.7%	18.3%	2.9%	5.54	3.56	+0.6
2020	26	MLB MLE	Atlanta Braves	22	0	22	85	24	7	1	0%	1.0	28.2%	8.2%	20.0%	1.2%	0.83	2.40	+0.6
2020	26	MLB RAW	Atlanta Braves	22	0	22	85	24	7	1	0%	1.0	28.2%	8.2%	20.0%	1.2%	0.83	2.45	+0.5
2021	27	MIX MLE	2 levels	68	0	60	246	67	23	2	0%	0.9	25.8%	9.0%	16.7%	0.9%	3.32	2.57	+1.4
2021	27	MIX RAW	2 levels	68	0	60	246	67	23	2	0%	0.9	27.2%	9.3%	17.9%	0.8%	3.32	2.45	+1.5
2022	28	MLB MLE	Atlanta Braves	75	0	70	271	94	15	5	0%	0.9	34.7%	5.5%	29.2%	1.8%	2.06	1.88	+2.2
2022	28	MLB RAW	Atlanta Braves	75	0	70	271	94	15	5	0%	0.9	34.7%	5.5%	29.2%	1.8%	2.06	1.99	+2.2
2023	29	MIX MLE	2 levels	72	0	67	268	84	20	6	0%	0.9	31.5%	7.3%	24.2%	2.3%	3.64	2.63	+1.5
2023	29	MIX RAW	2 levels	72	0	67	268	84	20	6	0%	0.9	31.3%	7.5%	23.9%	2.2%	3.64	2.65	+1.5
2024	30	MIX MLE	3 levels	42	1	37	146	38	12	6	2%	0.9	26.1%	7.5%	18.7%	4.5%	2.65	4.30	+0.1
2024	30	MIX MLE	3 levels	42	1	37	146	38	12	6	2%	0.9	26.1%	7.5%	18.7%	4.5%	2.65	4.30	+0.1
2024	30	MIX RAW	3 levels	42	1	37	146	38	12	6	2%	0.9	26.0%	8.2%	17.8%	4.1%	2.65	4.12	+0.2
2025	31	MLB MLE	New York Mets	13	0	11	44	14	5	0	0%	0.8	31.8%	11.4%	20.5%	0.0%	1.64	1.85	+0.4
2025	31	MLB MLE	New York Mets	13	0	11	44	14	5	0	0%	0.8	31.8%	11.4%	20.5%	0.0%	1.64	1.85	+0.4
2025	31	MLB RAW	New York Mets	13	0	11	44	14	5	0	0%	0.8	31.8%	11.4%	20.5%	0.0%	1.64	1.92	+0.3
2026	32	MIX MLE	4 levels	60	2	57	229	48	8	9	3%	0.9	22.0%	3.8%	18.3%	4.8%	2.37	4.36	+0.1
2026	32	MIX MLE	4 levels	60	2	57	229	48	8	9	3%	0.9	22.0%	3.8%	18.3%	4.8%	2.37	4.36	+0.1
2026	32	MIX RAW	4 levels	60	2	57	229	48	8	9	3%	0.9	21.0%	3.5%	17.5%	3.9%	2.37	3.89	+0.4
▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded)
MLB Career	—			445	0	405	1668	477	124	36	0%	0.9	28.6%	7.4%	21.2%	2.2%	3.15	2.82	+8.4
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	33	MLB	MIN	48	0	50	211	48	10	8	0%	1.0	22.7%	4.7%	18.1%	3.7%	3.94	4.19	+0.2
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	34	MLB MLE	MIN	40	0	42	176	38	9	7	0%	1.0	21.8%	5.2%	16.7%	4.0%	4.27	4.50	+0.0
2029	35	MLB MLE	MIN	29	0	30	127	26	7	6	0%	1.0	20.9%	5.7%	15.2%	4.4%	4.61	4.83	-0.1
2030	36	MLB MLE	MIN	18	0	19	80	16	5	4	0%	1.0	19.9%	6.3%	13.5%	4.7%	4.97	5.20	-0.1
2028	34	MLB CTX	MIN	40	0	42	177	39	9	7	0%	1.1	21.8%	5.2%	16.7%	4.0%	4.27	4.50	+0.0
2029	35	MLB CTX	MIN	29	0	30	127	26	7	6	0%	1.0	20.9%	5.7%	15.2%	4.4%	4.61	4.83	-0.1
2030	36	MLB CTX	MIN	18	0	19	80	16	5	4	0%	1.1	19.9%	6.3%	13.5%	4.7%	4.97	5.20	-0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		531	0	496	2050	558	145	52	0%	0.9	27.2%	7.1%	20.1%	2.6%	3.40	3.10	+8.6
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		214	0	200	827	225	58	21	0%	0.9	27.2%	7.1%	20.1%	2.6%	3.40	3.10	+3.4
Career	—	MLE		546	3	511	2087	594	158	46	1%	0.9	28.5%	7.6%	20.9%	2.2%	2.96	2.85	+8.1
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		214	1	200	817	233	62	18	1%	0.9	28.5%	7.6%	20.9%	2.2%	2.96	2.85	+3.3

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 AAASyracuse Mets · 8 IPFIP 2.40 → 2.51 (+0.12)K% 13.3% → 11.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	13.33%	—	×0.860	11.47%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	3.33%	—	×0.900	3.00%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.000	×1.100	0.00%

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 2.40 → 2.51, 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).

2021 AAAGwinnett Stripers · 7 IPFIP 1.24 → 1.72 (+0.48)K% 40.0% → 35.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	40.00%	—	×0.880	35.20%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.00%	—	×1.050	12.60%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.001	×1.100	0.00%

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 100).

Result: FIP 1.24 → 1.72, 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 AAAGwinnett Stripers · 23 IPFIP 3.14 → 4.01 (+0.86)K% 31.9% → 28.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	31.91%	—	×0.880	28.09%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	3.19%	—	×1.050	3.35%
HR / BF /BF	4.26%	÷0.899	×1.100	5.20%

Result: FIP 3.14 → 4.01, 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 AAAGwinnett Braves · 15 IPFIP 3.64 → 4.07 (+0.43)K% 23.9% → 21.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.94%	—	×0.880	21.07%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.08%	—	×1.050	14.79%
HR / BF /BF	1.41%	÷0.972	×1.100	1.59%

Result: FIP 3.64 → 4.07, 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 AAMississippi Braves · 19 IPFIP 0.66 → 1.41 (+0.75)K% 40.8% → 33.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	40.79%	—	×0.810	33.04%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.89%	—	×1.100	8.68%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.084	×1.200	0.00%

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 117).

Result: FIP 0.66 → 1.41, 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 A+Carolina Mudcats · 9 IPFIP 2.11 → 2.90 (+0.79)K% 29.4% → 22.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.41%	—	×0.770	22.65%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.76%	—	×1.150	13.53%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.362	×1.250	0.00%

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 172).

Result: FIP 2.11 → 2.90, 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 ARome Braves · 7 IPFIP 1.52 → 2.16 (+0.64)K% 25.0% → 18.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.00%	—	×0.740	18.50%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.17%	—	×1.180	4.92%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.965	×1.300	0.00%

Factors used: pitcher A level factors — K ×0.74, BB ×1.18, HR ×1.30. 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 1.52 → 2.16, 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
A.J. Minter (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.19	22.7%	4.7%	3.7%	—	4.76	21.1%	15.5%	90	+0.57	—	—	—
Pedro Borbón L 2001 · 3.90 FIP	33	SU	3.90	20.7%	4.1%	3.7%	.258	4.57	21.6%	14.3%	50	+0.67	2.26	264	82
Hideki Okajima L 2009 · 3.95 FIP	33	SU	3.95	20.5%	7.0%	3.1%	.268	4.27	15.5%	8.5%	46	+0.32	3.05	238	79
Jamie Walker L 2004 · 3.48 FIP	33	SU	3.48	19.1%	3.2%	2.9%	.295	3.83	16.3%	12.1%	158	+0.35	3.48	442	77
Brian Moran L 2022 · 4.20 FIP	33	SU	4.20	21.7%	7.0%	3.7%	.304	3.72	21.5%	14.5%	152	-0.48	1.80	421	74
Joey Eischen L 2003 · 4.00 FIP	33	SU	4.00	18.1%	5.4%	3.2%	.309	3.44	19.6%	10.3%	69	-0.56	2.13	294	72
Edward Paredes L 2019 · 5.10 FIP	32	SU	5.10	21.5%	7.3%	5.3%	.364	—	—	—	—	—	2.36	130	70
Scott Sauerbeck L 2005 · 3.75 FIP	33	SU	3.75	22.3%	8.9%	2.5%	.298	5.05	14.0%	0.0%	25	+1.30	2.79	386	68
Francisley Bueno L 2014 · 3.61 FIP	33	SU	3.61	14.1%	3.5%	2.3%	.289	3.94	13.6%	6.9%	138	+0.33	2.43	188	68
Adam Liberatore L 2018 · 4.28 FIP	31	SU	4.28	18.6%	9.1%	2.9%	.354	—	—	—	—	—	2.38	124	65
Zach Phillips L 2019 · 3.67 FIP	32	SU	3.67	19.1%	8.5%	2.0%	.355	—	—	—	—	—	2.33	202	65
Brady Feigl L 2024 · 4.12 FIP	33	SU	4.12	23.7%	4.7%	4.4%	.312	3.70	22.2%	14.9%	14	-0.42	2.69	212	64
Tom Martin L 2003 · 3.82 FIP	33	SU	3.82	24.3%	9.5%	2.9%	.226	3.99	16.2%	8.6%	106	+0.17	3.40	303	63
Kelly Wunsch L 2005 · 3.82 FIP	33	SU	3.82	21.0%	11.4%	1.9%	.261	—	—	—	—	—	3.36	175	60
Juan Pablo Perez L 2013 · 3.68 FIP	34	SU	3.68	25.2%	11.5%	2.3%	.250	3.68	26.5%	11.2%	51	-0.00	1.75	104	60
Alejandro Soto L 2019 · 4.03 FIP	33	SW	4.03	17.1%	6.9%	2.7%	.376	—	—	—	—	—	3.96	280	60
Doug Creek L 2002 · 4.99 FIP	33	SU	4.99	21.4%	12.6%	3.8%	.288	5.79	17.1%	7.9%	36	+0.80	4.48	277	60
Anthony Gose L 2024 · 3.78 FIP	33	SU	3.78	26.4%	11.3%	2.7%	.279	5.07	21.5%	10.1%	97	+1.29	3.78	233	59
Brandon Mann L 2017 · 4.24 FIP	33	SU	4.24	19.8%	11.3%	2.5%	.286	3.59	17.8%	6.4%	52	-0.65	3.59	190	58
Hisanori Takahashi L 2010 · 3.50 FIP	35	SW	3.50	22.1%	7.0%	2.5%	.292	3.81	21.1%	15.0%	118	+0.31	3.50	240	58
Grant Dayton L 2021 · 4.00 FIP	33	SU	4.00	23.0%	8.2%	3.3%	.325	3.80	23.2%	13.5%	49	-0.20	1.63	277	58

Career Comps

Completed MLB careers (no pro action in 2+ yrs) whose totals — actual + projected — most resemble this player's. Pool: 1,234 reliever careers (754 from 1990-2025 + 480 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	2.7	45	26.8%	7.4%	1.03	3.45
Ryan Pressly ('25)	3.5	53	25.2%	7.2%	0.86	3.33
Jake McGee ('22)	2.9	48	26.0%	6.6%	1.10	3.71
Sergio Romo ('22)	3.6	52	27.0%	6.1%	1.06	3.21
Joe Hoerner ('63-'77, 8 WAR*)	2.8	51	23.2%*	7.9%*	1.21*	3.52*
Jeff Montgomery ('87-'99, 19 WAR*)	4.3	72	26.2%*	7.6%*	1.01*	3.16*
Paul Assenmacher ('86-'99, 12 WAR*)	4.3	61	27.8%*	8.3%*	0.98*	3.61*