Kyle Wilcox
P Albuquerque Isotopes| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 28 | MIX2 levels | 17 | 1 | 17 | 2.16 | 4.42 | 32.4% | 25.7% | — | K 25.1% · BB 26.6% · FIP 5.57 | |
| 2023 | 29 | MIX2 levels | 48 | 0 | 55 | 2.62 | 2.81 | 31.7% | 15.0% | — | K 25.9% · BB 15.4% · FIP 3.60 | |
| 2024 | 30 | AAACOL | 16 | 0 | 26 | 9.12 | 6.22 | 22.6% | 18.8% | — | K 19.4% · BB 16.9% · FIP 5.68 | |
| 2025 | 31 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2026 | 32 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2027PROJ | 33 | MLBCOL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4.77 | 4.77 | 21.9% | 11.7% | -0.0 | ||
| 2028PROJ6% MLB | 34 | MLBCOL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4.89 | 5.00 | 21.5% | 11.9% | -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) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2016 | 22 | A MLE | Clinton LumberKings | 36 | 9 | 76 | 365 | 80 | 68 | 2 | 25% | 2.1 | 16.2% | 22.0% | -5.8% | 0.7% | 7.11 | 4.92 | — |
| 2016 | 22 | A RAW | Clinton LumberKings | 36 | 9 | 76 | 365 | 80 | 68 | 2 | 25% | 2.1 | 21.9% | 18.6% | 3.3% | 0.5% | 7.11 | 4.02 | — |
| 2017 | 23 | A MLE | Clinton LumberKings | 21 | 0 | 33 | 147 | 52 | 21 | 4 | 0% | 1.6 | 26.2% | 16.9% | 9.3% | 3.8% | 3.78 | 5.11 | — |
| 2017 | 23 | A RAW | Clinton LumberKings | 21 | 0 | 33 | 147 | 52 | 21 | 4 | 0% | 1.6 | 35.4% | 14.3% | 21.1% | 2.7% | 3.78 | 3.43 | — |
| 2018 | 24 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 37 | 0 | 59 | 248 | 94 | 29 | 4 | 0% | 1.6 | 29.7% | 12.2% | 17.4% | 1.2% | 3.38 | 2.78 | — |
| 2018 | 24 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 37 | 0 | 59 | 248 | 94 | 29 | 4 | 0% | 1.6 | 37.9% | 11.7% | 26.2% | 1.6% | 3.38 | 2.26 | — |
| 2019 | 25 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 46 | 0 | 62 | 277 | 91 | 48 | 4 | 0% | 1.3 | 25.1% | 21.2% | 4.0% | 2.7% | 3.21 | 5.16 | — |
| 2019 | 25 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 46 | 0 | 62 | 277 | 91 | 48 | 4 | 0% | 1.3 | 32.9% | 17.3% | 15.5% | 1.4% | 3.21 | 3.33 | — |
| 2022 | 28 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 17 | 1 | 17 | 74 | 24 | 19 | 1 | 6% | 1.0 | 25.1% | 26.6% | -1.4% | 2.2% | 2.16 | 5.57 | — |
| 2022 | 28 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 17 | 1 | 17 | 74 | 24 | 19 | 1 | 6% | 1.0 | 32.4% | 25.7% | 6.8% | 1.4% | 2.16 | 4.42 | — |
| 2023 | 29 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 48 | 0 | 55 | 227 | 72 | 34 | 2 | 0% | 1.1 | 25.9% | 15.4% | 10.4% | 1.3% | 2.62 | 3.60 | — |
| 2023 | 29 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 48 | 0 | 55 | 227 | 72 | 34 | 2 | 0% | 1.1 | 31.7% | 15.0% | 16.7% | 0.9% | 2.62 | 2.81 | — |
| 2024 | 30 | AAA MLE | Albuquerque Isotopes | 16 | 0 | 26 | 133 | 30 | 25 | 5 | 0% | 1.6 | 19.4% | 16.9% | 2.5% | 3.8% | 9.12 | 5.68 | — |
| 2024 | 30 | AAA MLE | Albuquerque Isotopes | 16 | 0 | 26 | 133 | 30 | 25 | 5 | 0% | 1.6 | 19.4% | 16.9% | 2.5% | 3.8% | 9.12 | 5.68 | — |
| 2024 | 30 | AAA RAW | Albuquerque Isotopes | 16 | 0 | 26 | 133 | 30 | 25 | 5 | 0% | 1.6 | 22.6% | 18.8% | 3.8% | 3.8% | 9.12 | 6.22 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 33 | MLB | COL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 21.9% | 11.7% | 10.2% | 3.0% | 4.77 | 4.77 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 34 | MLB MLE | COL | 16 | 0 | 16 | 70 | 15 | 8 | 2 | 0% | 1.0 | 21.5% | 11.9% | 9.6% | 3.3% | 4.89 | 5.00 | -0.1 |
| 2028 | 34 | MLB CTX | COL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 21.5% | 11.9% | 9.6% | 3.3% | 4.89 | 5.00 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0% | 0.9 | 21.5% | 11.9% | 9.6% | 3.3% | 4.89 | 4.62 | -0.0 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 190 | 0 | 200 | 844 | 220 | 0 | 0 | 0% | 1.1 | 21.5% | 11.9% | 9.6% | 3.3% | 4.89 | 4.62 | -0.2 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 221 | 10 | 327 | 1471 | 344 | 271 | 28 | 5% | 1.5 | 23.4% | 18.4% | 5.0% | 1.9% | 4.51 | 4.52 | -0.1 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 135 | 6 | 200 | 900 | 210 | 166 | 17 | 5% | 1.5 | 23.4% | 18.4% | 5.0% | 1.9% | 4.51 | 4.52 | -1.1 | |
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.
2024 AAAAlbuquerque Isotopes · 26 IPFIP 5.64 → 5.68 (+0.04)K% 22.6% → 19.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 22.56% | — | ×0.860 | 19.40% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 18.80% | — | ×0.900 | 16.92% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.76% | ÷1.096 | ×1.100 | 3.77% |
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 5.64 → 5.68, 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).
2023 AAMississippi Braves · 42 IPFIP 2.22 → 3.30 (+1.08)K% 37.0% → 30.0%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 36.99% | — | ×0.810 | 29.97% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 12.72% | — | ×1.100 | 13.99% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.16% | ÷0.793 | ×1.200 | 1.75% |
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 59).
Result: FIP 2.22 → 3.30, 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 AAAGwinnett Stripers · 13 IPFIP 4.66 → 4.56 (−0.11)K% 14.8% → 12.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 14.81% | — | ×0.860 | 12.74% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 22.22% | — | ×0.900 | 20.00% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷0.984 | ×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 97).
Result: FIP 4.66 → 4.56, 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).
2022 AAMississippi Braves · 13 IPFIP 4.48 → 5.57 (+1.08)K% 31.0% → 25.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 31.03% | — | ×0.810 | 25.14% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 24.14% | — | ×1.100 | 26.55% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.72% | ÷0.927 | ×1.200 | 2.23% |
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 85).
Result: FIP 4.48 → 5.57, 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 A+Modesto Nuts · 53 IPFIP 3.59 → 5.16 (+1.56)K% 32.6% → 25.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 32.64% | — | ×0.770 | 25.13% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 18.41% | — | ×1.150 | 21.17% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.67% | ÷0.768 | ×1.250 | 2.72% |
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 54).
Result: FIP 3.59 → 5.16, 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).
2019 AAArkansas Travelers · 9 IPFIP 1.54 → 2.23 (+0.68)K% 34.2% → 27.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 34.21% | — | ×0.810 | 27.71% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 10.53% | — | ×1.100 | 11.58% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷0.784 | ×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 57).
Result: FIP 1.54 → 2.23, 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 AClinton LumberKings · 54 IPFIP 1.52 → 2.78 (+1.26)K% 40.1% → 29.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 40.09% | — | ×0.740 | 29.67% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 10.36% | — | ×1.180 | 12.23% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.90% | ÷1.013 | ×1.300 | 1.16% |
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 103).
Result: FIP 1.52 → 2.78, 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 A+Modesto Nuts · 5 IPFIP 8.62 → 10.91 (+2.29)K% 19.2% → 14.8%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 19.23% | — | ×0.770 | 14.81% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 23.08% | — | ×1.150 | 26.54% |
| HR / BF /BF | 7.69% | ÷0.925 | ×1.250 | 10.39% |
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 85).
Result: FIP 8.62 → 10.91, 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).