Dean Kremer

P Minnesota Twins

Age 31 RHP 6'2" / 210 lbs MLB peak 0.8 · 2027

Overview

MLBSP40-MAN

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	28	MIX2 levels	27	27	138	4.55	4.45	22.0%	9.2%	1.5	K 22.2% · BB 9.2% · FIP 4.19
2025	29	MLBBAL	31	29	172	4.19	3.90	20.1%	6.4%	3.1
2026	30	MIX2 levels	21	21	110	4.17	4.25	25.3%	7.7%	1.5	K 24.5% · BB 7.6% · FIP 4.38
2027PROJ	31	MLBMIN	14	14	81	4.38	4.52	22.0%	7.4%	0.8
2028PROJ	32	MLBMIN	14	14	83	4.62	4.78	21.2%	7.8%	0.6
2029PROJ	33	MLBMIN	12	12	70	4.88	5.06	20.3%	8.2%	0.3

Last 3 seasons WAR 6.1 · Next 3 projected WAR 1.7Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Skills · percentileStatcast 2026

K%58

xwOBA vs49

FB Velo26

Form2.60 ERA (proj 4.38) · K 24.0% (proj 22.0%) · BB 6.7% (proj 7.4%) ▲ last 60d · 28 IP through Oct 27

CompsChase Anderson (age 31) · Miguel González (age 31) · Tim Adleman (age 31)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 115106vR 98

ERA4.38

FIP4.52

K%22.0%

BB%7.4%

K-BB%14.6%

Proj IP81

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 81 IP

Statcast · Contract

Statcast Percentiles

FB Velo

p2692.8

Whiff%

p7028.4%

p5823.6%

xwOBA vs

p490.313

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	20	MIX MLE	2 levels	12	6	32	118	35	7	0	50%	2.6	21.3%	7.2%	14.1%	0.0%	2.27	2.21	—
2016	20	MIX RAW	2 levels	12	6	32	118	35	7	0	50%	2.6	29.7%	5.9%	23.7%	0.0%	2.27	1.55	—
2017	21	A+ MLE	Rancho Cucamonga Quakes	33	6	80	356	96	34	6	18%	2.4	20.8%	11.0%	9.8%	1.9%	5.17	3.80	—
2017	21	A+ RAW	Rancho Cucamonga Quakes	33	6	80	356	96	34	6	18%	2.4	27.0%	9.6%	17.4%	1.7%	5.17	2.95	—
2018	22	MIX MLE	2 levels	25	25	131	534	178	46	10	100%	5.3	26.1%	9.7%	16.4%	2.2%	2.88	3.32	—
2018	22	MIX RAW	2 levels	25	25	131	534	178	46	10	100%	5.3	33.3%	8.6%	24.7%	1.9%	2.88	2.43	—
2019	23	MIX MLE	3 levels	21	21	114	475	122	37	11	100%	5.4	20.4%	8.3%	12.1%	3.1%	3.72	4.12	—
2019	23	MIX RAW	3 levels	21	21	114	475	122	37	11	100%	5.4	25.7%	7.8%	17.9%	2.3%	3.72	3.19	—
2020	24	MLB MLE	Baltimore Orioles	4	4	19	83	22	12	0	100%	4.7	26.5%	14.5%	12.0%	0.0%	4.82	2.69	+0.6
2020	24	MLB RAW	Baltimore Orioles	4	4	19	83	22	12	0	100%	4.7	26.5%	14.5%	12.0%	0.0%	4.82	2.67	+0.6
2021	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	30	26	116	515	116	45	26	87%	3.9	20.9%	8.9%	12.0%	4.9%	6.13	5.15	+0.3
2021	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	30	26	116	515	116	45	26	87%	3.9	22.5%	8.7%	13.8%	5.0%	6.13	5.18	+0.3
2022	26	MIX MLE	3 levels	25	24	134	544	105	36	11	96%	5.4	17.0%	6.6%	10.4%	2.2%	3.01	3.69	+2.8
2022	26	MIX RAW	3 levels	25	24	134	544	105	36	11	96%	5.4	19.3%	6.6%	12.7%	2.0%	3.01	3.41	+3.3
2023	27	MLB MLE	Baltimore Orioles	32	32	173	735	157	55	27	100%	5.4	21.4%	7.5%	13.9%	3.7%	4.12	4.28	+2.3
2023	27	MLB RAW	Baltimore Orioles	32	32	173	735	157	55	27	100%	5.4	21.4%	7.5%	13.9%	3.7%	4.12	4.27	+2.3
2024	28	MIX MLE	2 levels	27	27	138	599	132	55	22	100%	5.1	22.2%	9.2%	13.0%	3.3%	4.55	4.19	+2.0
2024	28	MIX MLE	2 levels	27	27	138	599	132	55	22	100%	5.1	22.2%	9.2%	13.0%	3.3%	4.55	4.19	+2.0
2024	28	MIX RAW	2 levels	27	27	138	599	132	55	22	100%	5.1	22.0%	9.2%	12.9%	3.7%	4.55	4.45	+1.5
2025	29	MLB MLE	Baltimore Orioles	31	29	172	708	142	45	22	94%	5.5	20.1%	6.4%	13.7%	3.0%	4.19	3.84	+3.2
2025	29	MLB MLE	Baltimore Orioles	31	29	172	708	142	45	22	94%	5.5	20.1%	6.4%	13.7%	3.0%	4.19	3.84	+3.2
2025	29	MLB RAW	Baltimore Orioles	31	29	172	708	142	45	22	94%	5.5	20.1%	6.4%	13.7%	3.1%	4.19	3.90	+3.1
2026	30	MIX MLE	2 levels	21	21	110	439	111	34	19	100%	5.2	24.5%	7.6%	16.9%	4.3%	4.17	4.38	+1.3
2026	30	MIX MLE	2 levels	21	21	110	439	111	34	19	100%	5.2	24.5%	7.6%	16.9%	4.3%	4.17	4.38	+1.3
2026	30	MIX RAW	2 levels	21	21	110	439	111	34	19	100%	5.2	25.3%	7.7%	17.5%	4.3%	4.17	4.25	+1.5
▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded)
MLB Career	—			143	140	762	3200	664	251	113	98%	5.3	20.8%	7.8%	12.9%	3.5%	4.31	4.27	+10.1
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	31	MLB	MIN	14	14	81	342	75	25	12	100%	5.8	22.0%	7.4%	14.6%	3.6%	4.38	4.52	+0.8
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	32	MLB MLE	MIN	14	14	83	352	75	27	14	100%	6.0	21.2%	7.8%	13.4%	3.8%	4.62	4.78	+0.6
2029	33	MLB MLE	MIN	12	12	70	295	60	24	12	100%	5.8	20.3%	8.2%	12.1%	4.1%	4.88	5.06	+0.3
2028	32	MLB CTX	MIN	14	14	83	350	74	27	13	100%	5.9	21.2%	7.8%	13.4%	3.8%	4.62	4.78	+0.6
2029	33	MLB CTX	MIN	12	12	70	296	60	24	12	100%	5.8	20.3%	8.2%	12.1%	4.1%	4.88	5.06	+0.3
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		169	166	915	3847	799	303	139	98%	5.4	20.8%	7.9%	12.9%	3.6%	4.38	4.32	+11.6
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		37	36	200	841	175	66	30	98%	5.4	20.8%	7.9%	12.9%	3.6%	4.38	4.32	+2.5
Career	—	MLE		261	221	1218	5106	1097	422	157	85%	4.7	21.5%	8.3%	13.2%	3.1%	4.11	4.02	+10.9
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		43	36	200	838	180	69	26	85%	4.7	21.5%	8.3%	13.2%	3.1%	4.11	4.02	+2.4

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.

2026 AAANorfolk Tides · 20 IPFIP 1.86 → 2.24 (+0.38)K% 33.3% → 28.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	33.33%	—	×0.860	28.67%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	6.67%	—	×0.900	6.00%
HR / BF /BF	1.33%	÷1.000	×1.100	1.47%

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 1.86 → 2.24, 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 AAANorfolk Tides · 9 IPFIP 7.32 → 7.94 (+0.62)K% 19.6% → 16.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.57%	—	×0.860	16.83%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.70%	—	×0.900	7.83%
HR / BF /BF	8.70%	÷0.996	×1.100	9.60%

Result: FIP 7.32 → 7.94, 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 AAANorfolk Tides · 7 IPFIP -0.28 → 0.30 (+0.58)K% 52.0% → 45.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	52.00%	—	×0.880	45.76%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.00%	—	×1.050	8.40%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.970	×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 94).

Result: FIP -0.28 → 0.30, 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).

2021 AAANorfolk Tides · 62 IPFIP 3.71 → 4.18 (+0.47)K% 25.6% → 22.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.56%	—	×0.880	22.49%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.41%	—	×1.050	7.78%
HR / BF /BF	3.33%	÷1.009	×1.100	3.63%

Result: FIP 3.71 → 4.18, 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 AABowie Baysox · 85 IPFIP 3.46 → 4.28 (+0.81)K% 25.0% → 20.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.00%	—	×0.810	20.25%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.33%	—	×1.100	9.17%
HR / BF /BF	2.59%	÷0.987	×1.200	3.14%

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 97).

Result: FIP 3.46 → 4.28, 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).

2019 AAANorfolk Tides · 19 IPFIP 2.91 → 3.48 (+0.57)K% 23.9% → 21.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.86%	—	×0.880	21.00%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.55%	—	×1.050	4.77%
HR / BF /BF	2.27%	÷0.889	×1.100	2.81%

Result: FIP 2.91 → 3.48, 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+Frederick Keys · 10 IPFIP 1.37 → 2.26 (+0.89)K% 35.9% → 27.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	35.90%	—	×0.770	27.64%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.26%	—	×1.150	11.79%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.135	×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 127).

Result: FIP 1.37 → 2.26, 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+Rancho Cucamonga Quakes · 79 IPFIP 2.32 → 3.39 (+1.06)K% 35.5% → 27.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	35.51%	—	×0.770	27.35%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.10%	—	×1.150	9.31%
HR / BF /BF	2.18%	÷1.058	×1.250	2.58%

Result: FIP 2.32 → 3.39, 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
Dean Kremer (OGILVIE)	—	—	—	—	—	3.6%	—	4.91	20.8%	12.8%	153	+0.39	—	—	—
Chase Anderson R 2019 · 4.39 FIP	31	SP	4.39	20.9%	8.1%	3.7%	.259	5.39	19.2%	10.0%	218	+1.00	3.30	1,260	70
Miguel González R 2015 · 4.53 FIP	31	SP	4.53	17.5%	7.9%	3.5%	.289	4.23	15.9%	9.0%	325	-0.30	3.72	905	65
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	64
Hideki Irabu R 2000 · 4.38 FIP	31	SP	4.38	17.0%	5.7%	3.6%	.374	5.19	17.2%	11.0%	64	+0.81	3.78	514	64
Daisuke Matsuzaka R 2012 · 5.55 FIP	31	SP	5.55	19.1%	9.3%	5.2%	.329	3.83	21.1%	9.5%	122	-1.72	3.77	790	63
Kenta Maeda R 2019 · 3.68 FIP	31	SP-	3.68	27.1%	8.0%	3.4%	.240	3.44	27.8%	22.0%	173	-0.24	2.87	1,092	61
Orlando Hernandez R 2001 · 5.30 FIP	31	SP	5.30	18.6%	9.9%	4.6%	.256	3.78	20.4%	13.1%	231	-1.52	3.35	1,315	60
Mike Fiers R 2016 · 4.30 FIP	31	SP	4.30	18.5%	5.8%	3.7%	.308	4.96	19.2%	12.2%	510	+0.66	2.83	1,140	58
Tanner Roark R 2018 · 3.99 FIP	31	SP	3.99	19.2%	6.2%	3.2%	.289	4.57	21.1%	13.1%	259	+0.58	2.40	1,194	57
Joe Biagini R 2021 · 4.80 FIP	31	SP	4.80	18.0%	10.6%	3.4%	.309	4.53	16.4%	6.6%	39	-0.27	2.66	624	55
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	54
Brad Peacock R 2019 · 4.22 FIP	31	SP-	4.22	25.1%	8.1%	4.0%	.261	4.15	22.8%	12.5%	96	-0.07	2.97	748	54
Chuck Smith R 2001 · 3.99 FIP	31	SP	3.99	18.4%	8.1%	2.6%	.289	—	—	—	—	—	3.08	211	54
Tom Koehler R 2017 · 4.66 FIP	31	SP-	4.66	22.4%	9.0%	4.2%	.298	—	—	—	—	—	3.76	822	53
Jeremy Hefner R 2016 · 4.64 FIP	30	SP	4.64	16.8%	9.1%	3.3%	.305	—	—	—	—	—	3.56	322	52
Stan Spencer R 2000 · 4.42 FIP	30	SP	4.42	19.2%	8.7%	3.4%	.259	—	—	—	—	—	3.61	119	51
Brian Tollberg R 2002 · 4.98 FIP	29	SP	4.98	11.5%	5.9%	3.8%	.339	—	—	—	—	—	4.02	297	51
Yu Darvish R 2018 · 4.50 FIP	31	SP	4.50	27.2%	11.7%	4.0%	.282	3.48	30.5%	24.0%	421	-1.02	1.97	1,798	50
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	50
Jose Samayoa R 2019 · 4.05 FIP	29	SP	4.05	19.4%	7.0%	3.1%	.314	—	—	—	—	—	3.44	262	50

Career Comps

Completed MLB careers (no pro action in 2+ yrs) whose totals — actual + projected — most resemble this player's. Pool: 927 starter careers (497 from 1990-2025 + 430 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	5.0	111	20.9%	7.8%	1.39	4.38
Chase Anderson ('24)	5.5	101	19.7%	8.1%	1.48	4.41
Marco Estrada ('19)	6.3	139	21.0%	7.6%	1.43	4.29
Dennis Bennett ('62-'68, 7 WAR*)	4.3	123	19.8%*	8.1%*	1.41*	4.40*
Derek Holland ('21)	7.3	113	19.7%	8.4%	1.35	4.62
Larry McWilliams ('78-'90, 10 WAR*)	7.8	130	19.0%*	8.1%*	1.24*	4.56*
Greg Harris ('88-'95, 10 WAR*)	4.5	130	19.7%*	7.9%*	1.40*	4.10*