Patrick Weigel
P Albuquerque Isotopes| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 30 | MIX2 levels | 21 | 0 | 22 | 2.45 | 2.33 | 25.3% | 11.1% | — | K 22.9% · BB 11.6% · FIP 2.64 |
| 2025 | 31 | AAAWSH | 31 | 0 | 34 | 8.29 | 5.57 | 29.5% | 9.6% | — | K 25.4% · BB 8.7% · FIP 6.09 |
| 2026 | 32 | AAACOL | 29 | 9 | 48 | 7.50 | 5.45 | 20.4% | 16.7% | — | K 17.6% · BB 15.0% · FIP 5.28 |
| 2027PROJ | 33 | MLBCOL | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5.31 | 5.31 | 19.9% | 12.8% | -0.0 | |
| 2028PROJ6% MLB | 34 | MLBCOL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5.37 | 5.48 | 19.7% | 13.0% | -0.0 |
Grades · 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) | |||||||||||||||||||
| ▸ Model inputs — neutral MLE (past 3 seasons + 2027 so far) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2015 | 21 | ROK MLE | Danville Braves | 14 | 14 | 52 | 238 | 49 | 26 | 2 | 100% | 3.7 | 14.0% | 13.7% | 0.3% | 1.2% | 4.53 | 4.29 | — |
| 2015 | 21 | ROK RAW | Danville Braves | 14 | 14 | 52 | 238 | 49 | 26 | 2 | 100% | 3.7 | 20.6% | 10.9% | 9.7% | 0.8% | 4.53 | 3.22 | — |
| 2016 | 22 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 25 | 24 | 150 | 604 | 152 | 55 | 9 | 96% | 6.0 | 18.8% | 10.6% | 8.2% | 1.9% | 2.47 | 3.92 | — |
| 2016 | 22 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 25 | 24 | 150 | 604 | 152 | 55 | 9 | 96% | 6.0 | 25.2% | 9.1% | 16.1% | 1.5% | 2.47 | 2.95 | — |
| 2017 | 23 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 15 | 15 | 78 | 332 | 68 | 28 | 7 | 100% | 5.2 | 17.2% | 9.0% | 8.2% | 2.5% | 4.14 | 4.15 | — |
| 2017 | 23 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 15 | 15 | 78 | 332 | 68 | 28 | 7 | 100% | 5.2 | 20.5% | 8.4% | 12.0% | 2.1% | 4.14 | 3.60 | — |
| 2018 | 24 | ROK MLE | GCL Braves | 4 | 3 | 4 | 12 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 75% | 1.0 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 50.0% | 0.0% | 0.00 | -1.12 | — |
| 2018 | 24 | ROK RAW | GCL Braves | 4 | 3 | 4 | 12 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 75% | 1.0 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 50.0% | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.10 | — |
| 2019 | 25 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 28 | 18 | 79 | 328 | 71 | 40 | 9 | 64% | 2.8 | 18.7% | 12.9% | 5.8% | 3.4% | 2.73 | 5.00 | — |
| 2019 | 25 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 28 | 18 | 79 | 328 | 71 | 40 | 9 | 64% | 2.8 | 21.6% | 12.2% | 9.5% | 2.7% | 2.73 | 4.30 | — |
| 2020 | 26 | MLB MLE | Atlanta Braves | 1 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0% | 0.7 | 0.0% | 42.9% | -42.9% | 0.0% | 27.00 | 8.53 | -0.0 |
| 2020 | 26 | MLB RAW | Atlanta Braves | 1 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0% | 0.7 | 0.0% | 42.9% | -42.9% | 0.0% | 27.00 | 16.60 | -0.1 |
| 2021 | 27 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 39 | 1 | 47 | 237 | 57 | 41 | 7 | 3% | 1.2 | 19.6% | 18.0% | 1.6% | 3.3% | 7.04 | 5.56 | -0.6 |
| 2021 | 27 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 39 | 1 | 47 | 237 | 57 | 41 | 7 | 3% | 1.2 | 24.1% | 17.3% | 6.8% | 3.0% | 7.04 | 5.21 | -0.4 |
| 2022 | 28 | AAA MLE | Tacoma Rainiers | 53 | 1 | 62 | 273 | 63 | 38 | 6 | 2% | 1.2 | 20.3% | 14.6% | 5.7% | 2.1% | 4.21 | 4.40 | — |
| 2022 | 28 | AAA RAW | Tacoma Rainiers | 53 | 1 | 62 | 273 | 63 | 38 | 6 | 2% | 1.2 | 23.1% | 13.9% | 9.2% | 2.2% | 4.21 | 4.16 | — |
| 2024 | 30 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 21 | 0 | 22 | 99 | 25 | 11 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 22.9% | 11.6% | 11.2% | 0.0% | 2.45 | 2.64 | — |
| 2024 | 30 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 21 | 0 | 22 | 99 | 25 | 11 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 22.9% | 11.6% | 11.2% | 0.0% | 2.45 | 2.64 | — |
| 2024 | 30 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 21 | 0 | 22 | 99 | 25 | 11 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 25.3% | 11.1% | 14.1% | 0.0% | 2.45 | 2.33 | — |
| 2025 | 31 | AAA MLE | Rochester Red Wings | 31 | 0 | 34 | 156 | 46 | 15 | 10 | 0% | 1.1 | 25.4% | 8.7% | 16.7% | 7.3% | 8.29 | 6.09 | — |
| 2025 | 31 | AAA MLE | Rochester Red Wings | 31 | 0 | 34 | 156 | 46 | 15 | 10 | 0% | 1.1 | 25.4% | 8.7% | 16.7% | 7.3% | 8.29 | 6.09 | — |
| 2025 | 31 | AAA RAW | Rochester Red Wings | 31 | 0 | 34 | 156 | 46 | 15 | 10 | 0% | 1.1 | 29.5% | 9.6% | 19.9% | 6.4% | 8.29 | 5.57 | — |
| 2026 | 32 | AAA MLE | Albuquerque Isotopes | 29 | 9 | 48 | 240 | 49 | 40 | 7 | 31% | 1.7 | 17.6% | 15.0% | 2.6% | 3.2% | 7.50 | 5.28 | — |
| 2026 | 32 | AAA MLE | Albuquerque Isotopes | 29 | 9 | 48 | 240 | 49 | 40 | 7 | 31% | 1.7 | 17.6% | 15.0% | 2.6% | 3.2% | 7.50 | 5.28 | — |
| 2026 | 32 | AAA RAW | Albuquerque Isotopes | 29 | 9 | 48 | 240 | 49 | 40 | 7 | 31% | 1.7 | 20.4% | 16.7% | 3.8% | 2.9% | 7.50 | 5.45 | — |
| ▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| MLB Career | — | 4 | 0 | 5 | 28 | 9 | 7 | 1 | 0% | 1.2 | 32.1% | 25.0% | 7.1% | 3.6% | 7.71 | 6.53 | -0.1 | ||
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 33 | MLB | COL | 2 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 19.9% | 12.8% | 7.1% | 3.4% | 5.31 | 5.31 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 34 | MLB MLE | COL | 15 | 0 | 16 | 66 | 13 | 9 | 2 | 0% | 1.0 | 19.7% | 13.0% | 6.8% | 3.7% | 5.37 | 5.48 | -0.2 |
| 2028 | 34 | MLB CTX | COL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 19.7% | 13.0% | 6.8% | 3.7% | 5.37 | 5.48 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 5 | 0 | 6 | 32 | 10 | 7 | 1 | 0% | 1.1 | 30.7% | 23.6% | 7.1% | 3.6% | 7.35 | 5.47 | -0.1 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 174 | 0 | 200 | 1145 | 362 | 253 | 36 | 0% | 1.1 | 30.7% | 23.6% | 7.1% | 3.6% | 7.35 | 5.47 | -2.1 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 260 | 85 | 576 | 2526 | 478 | 316 | 67 | 33% | 2.2 | 18.9% | 12.5% | 6.4% | 2.6% | 4.25 | 4.53 | -0.3 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 90 | 29 | 200 | 877 | 166 | 110 | 23 | 33% | 2.2 | 18.9% | 12.5% | 6.4% | 2.6% | 4.25 | 4.53 | -2.7 | |
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 AAAAlbuquerque Isotopes · 48 IPFIP 5.09 → 5.28 (+0.19)K% 20.4% → 17.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 20.42% | — | ×0.860 | 17.56% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 16.67% | — | ×0.900 | 15.00% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.92% | ÷1.000 | ×1.100 | 3.21% |
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 5.09 → 5.28, 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 AAARochester Red Wings · 34 IPFIP 5.35 → 6.09 (+0.74)K% 29.5% → 25.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 29.49% | — | ×0.860 | 25.36% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.62% | — | ×0.900 | 8.65% |
| HR / BF /BF | 6.41% | ÷0.960 | ×1.100 | 7.35% |
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 92).
Result: FIP 5.35 → 6.09, 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).
2024 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 20 IPFIP 2.06 → 2.64 (+0.59)K% 28.2% → 22.9%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 28.24% | — | ×0.810 | 22.87% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 10.59% | — | ×1.100 | 11.65% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷1.089 | ×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 118).
Result: FIP 2.06 → 2.64, 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).
2022 AAATacoma Rainiers · 62 IPFIP 4.12 → 4.40 (+0.28)K% 23.1% → 20.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 23.08% | — | ×0.880 | 20.31% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 13.92% | — | ×1.050 | 14.62% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.20% | ÷1.144 | ×1.100 | 2.11% |
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 129).
Result: FIP 4.12 → 4.40, 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 AAANashville Sounds · 43 IPFIP 4.92 → 5.56 (+0.64)K% 22.2% → 19.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 22.22% | — | ×0.880 | 19.56% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 17.13% | — | ×1.050 | 17.99% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.78% | ÷0.915 | ×1.100 | 3.34% |
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 83).
Result: FIP 4.92 → 5.56, 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 · 63 IPFIP 4.71 → 5.42 (+0.71)K% 21.0% → 18.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 20.99% | — | ×0.880 | 18.47% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 11.83% | — | ×1.050 | 12.42% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.44% | ÷0.899 | ×1.100 | 4.20% |
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 80).
Result: FIP 4.71 → 5.42, 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 AAMississippi Braves · 16 IPFIP 2.78 → 3.34 (+0.56)K% 24.2% → 19.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 24.24% | — | ×0.810 | 19.64% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 13.64% | — | ×1.100 | 15.00% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷0.900 | ×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 80).
Result: FIP 2.78 → 3.34, 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 · 41 IPFIP 4.42 → 4.85 (+0.43)K% 16.8% → 14.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 16.76% | — | ×0.880 | 14.75% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.50% | — | ×1.050 | 9.97% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.79% | ÷0.972 | ×1.100 | 3.16% |
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 94).
Result: FIP 4.42 → 4.85, 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).