Ray Gaither

P Sugar Land Space Cowboys

Age 29 RHP 6'4" / 224 lbs AAA

Overview

AAAPROSPECT

MLB%10%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2023	25	AAHOU	30	0	33	3.51	4.66	22.4%	14.9%	—	K 18.1% · BB 16.4% · FIP 4.89
2024	26	AAAHOU	51	3	63	3.13	3.57	22.5%	12.4%	—	K 19.4% · BB 11.1% · FIP 3.84
2025	27	MIX2 levels	27	2	29	3.14	4.50	17.7%	12.1%	—	K 16.0% · BB 11.2% · FIP 4.83
2026	28	No MLB games played
2027PROJ	29	MLBHOU	2	0	2	4.80	4.80	19.0%	10.5%	-0.0
2028PROJ37% MLB	30	MLBHOU	6	0	6	4.86	4.93	19.1%	10.7%	-0.0

Next 2 projected WAR -0.0Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

CompsWirfin Obispo (age 30) · Dustin Molleken (age 30) · Jim Miller (age 30)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 124116vR 108

ERA4.80

FIP4.80

K%19.0%

BB%10.5%

K-BB%8.5%

Proj IP21

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 21 IP

Grades · Contract

Scouting Grades

K†4545

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)
2021	23	MIX MLE	3 levels	11	0	14	61	15	6	1	0%	1.2	24.6%	9.8%	14.8%	1.6%	3.95	3.17	—
2021	23	MIX RAW	3 levels	11	0	14	61	15	6	1	0%	1.2	24.6%	9.8%	14.8%	1.6%	3.95	3.17	—
2022	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	16	11	47	207	60	22	6	69%	3.0	21.9%	13.2%	8.7%	3.5%	3.99	4.85	—
2022	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	16	11	47	207	60	22	6	69%	3.0	29.0%	10.6%	18.4%	2.9%	3.99	3.61	—
2023	25	AA MLE	Corpus Christi Hooks	30	0	33	161	36	24	4	0%	1.1	18.1%	16.4%	1.7%	2.3%	3.51	4.89	—
2023	25	AA RAW	Corpus Christi Hooks	30	0	33	161	36	24	4	0%	1.1	22.4%	14.9%	7.5%	2.5%	3.51	4.66	—
2024	26	AAA MLE	Sugar Land Space Cowboys	51	3	63	275	62	34	4	6%	1.2	19.4%	11.1%	8.3%	1.8%	3.13	3.84	—
2024	26	AAA MLE	Sugar Land Space Cowboys	51	3	63	275	62	34	4	6%	1.2	19.4%	11.1%	8.3%	1.8%	3.13	3.84	—
2024	26	AAA RAW	Sugar Land Space Cowboys	51	3	63	275	62	34	4	6%	1.2	22.5%	12.4%	10.2%	1.5%	3.13	3.57	—
2025	27	MIX MLE	2 levels	27	2	29	124	22	15	3	7%	1.1	16.0%	11.2%	4.8%	3.0%	3.14	4.83	—
2025	27	MIX MLE	2 levels	27	2	29	124	22	15	3	7%	1.1	16.0%	11.2%	4.8%	3.0%	3.14	4.83	—
2025	27	MIX RAW	2 levels	27	2	29	124	22	15	3	7%	1.1	17.7%	12.1%	5.6%	2.4%	3.14	4.50	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	29	MLB	HOU	2	0	2	8	2	1	0	0%	1.0	19.0%	10.5%	8.5%	2.9%	4.80	4.80	-0.0
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	30	MLB MLE	HOU	16	0	16	70	13	7	2	0%	1.0	19.1%	10.7%	8.4%	3.1%	4.86	4.93	-0.1
2028	30	MLB CTX	HOU	6	0	6	25	5	3	1	0%	1.0	19.1%	10.7%	8.4%	3.1%	4.86	4.93	-0.0
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		6	0	6	26	5	3	1	0%	1.0	19.1%	10.7%	8.4%	3.1%	4.86	4.55	-0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	165	99	33	0%	1.1	19.1%	10.7%	8.4%	3.1%	4.86	4.55	-0.0
Career	—	MLE		135	16	186	828	163	104	21	12%	1.4	19.6%	12.6%	7.1%	2.5%	3.48	4.40	-0.1
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		145	17	200	889	175	112	22	12%	1.4	19.6%	12.6%	7.1%	2.5%	3.48	4.40	-0.9

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.

2025 AAASugar Land Space Cowboys · 26 IPFIP 4.56 → 4.83 (+0.27)K% 18.6% → 16.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	18.58%	—	×0.860	15.98%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.39%	—	×0.900	11.15%
HR / BF /BF	2.65%	÷0.961	×1.100	3.04%

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 4.56 → 4.83, 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 AAASugar Land Space Cowboys · 63 IPFIP 3.56 → 3.84 (+0.28)K% 22.5% → 19.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.55%	—	×0.860	19.39%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.36%	—	×0.900	11.13%
HR / BF /BF	1.45%	÷0.903	×1.100	1.77%

Result: FIP 3.56 → 3.84, 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 AACorpus Christi Hooks · 33 IPFIP 4.46 → 4.89 (+0.42)K% 22.4% → 18.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.36%	—	×0.810	18.11%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.91%	—	×1.100	16.40%
HR / BF /BF	2.48%	÷1.322	×1.200	2.26%

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 164).

Result: FIP 4.46 → 4.89, 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 A+Asheville Tourists · 41 IPFIP 3.65 → 4.85 (+1.20)K% 28.4% → 21.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.42%	—	×0.770	21.88%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.48%	—	×1.150	13.20%
HR / BF /BF	2.73%	÷0.972	×1.250	3.51%

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 94).

Result: FIP 3.65 → 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).

2022 ROKFCL Astros Blue · 6 IPFIP 3.10 → 4.87 (+1.77)K% 33.3% → 22.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	33.33%	—	×0.680	22.67%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.17%	—	×1.250	5.21%
HR / BF /BF	4.17%	÷1.058	×1.400	5.52%

Factors used: pitcher ROK level factors — K ×0.68, BB ×1.25, HR ×1.40. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 112).

Result: FIP 3.10 → 4.87, 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 A+Asheville Tourists · 6 IPFIP 5.06 → 5.61 (+0.55)K% 10.7% → 8.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	10.71%	—	×0.770	8.25%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.14%	—	×1.150	8.21%
HR / BF /BF	3.57%	÷1.131	×1.250	3.95%

Result: FIP 5.06 → 5.61, 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 AFayetteville Woodpeckers · 6 IPFIP 1.07 → 2.05 (+0.97)K% 36.0% → 26.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	36.00%	—	×0.740	26.64%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.00%	—	×1.180	9.44%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.176	×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 135).

Result: FIP 1.07 → 2.05, 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
Ray Gaither (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.80	19.0%	10.5%	2.9%	—	4.93	19.1%	8.4%	16	+0.13	—	—	—
Wirfin Obispo R 2015 · 4.80 FIP	30	SU	4.80	18.6%	12.2%	3.1%	.292	1.31	28.6%	24.5%	126	-3.49	1.30	218	88
Dustin Molleken R 2015 · 3.74 FIP	30	SU	3.74	20.4%	11.7%	1.6%	.287	3.90	20.6%	8.4%	77	+0.16	3.38	129	84
Jim Miller R 2012 · 4.56 FIP	30	SU	4.56	20.9%	11.8%	3.1%	.243	3.95	18.8%	14.7%	74	-0.61	3.95	140	84
Neil Wagner R 2013 · 4.02 FIP	29	SU	4.02	20.5%	7.5%	3.1%	.306	4.05	19.8%	7.5%	43	+0.03	3.11	135	82
Joe Nelson R 2006 · 3.91 FIP	31	SU	3.91	22.8%	10.4%	2.6%	.258	4.05	23.4%	12.8%	94	+0.14	3.08	139	82
Angel Castro R 2015 · 4.50 FIP	32	SU	4.50	15.9%	8.0%	3.1%	.268	4.28	13.6%	5.5%	231	-0.22	3.51	292	81
Thad Weber R 2013 · 5.18 FIP	28	SU	5.18	16.4%	13.1%	3.3%	.244	4.52	12.2%	6.0%	308	-0.66	4.40	378	81
Brian Sanches R 2008 · 4.74 FIP	29	SU	4.74	18.5%	9.3%	3.7%	.378	4.01	20.5%	10.8%	182	-0.73	3.39	229	80
Diego Moreno R 2016 · 3.75 FIP	29	SU	3.75	21.0%	8.2%	2.5%	.347	3.13	17.8%	11.9%	54	-0.62	2.29	187	80
Tyler Sturdevant R 2015 · 4.37 FIP	29	SU	4.37	21.3%	8.5%	3.6%	.241	3.97	18.5%	11.9%	118	-0.40	3.44	149	80
Carlos Fisher R 2011 · 4.33 FIP	28	SU	4.33	15.5%	9.1%	2.5%	.275	—	—	—	—	—	2.48	245	80
Brandon Cunniff R 2017 · 4.79 FIP	28	SU	4.79	20.1%	11.6%	3.5%	.275	6.80	13.9%	-1.9%	30	+2.01	3.89	180	80
Gregory Infante R 2016 · 4.47 FIP	29	SU	4.47	19.0%	12.3%	2.6%	.333	3.43	22.5%	15.8%	120	-1.04	2.97	230	80
Kevin Gryboski R 2003 · 3.67 FIP	29	SU	3.67	16.8%	8.9%	1.6%	.295	3.92	9.4%	0.2%	82	+0.25	3.67	178	79
Joe Colón J R 2017 · 4.25 FIP	27	SU	4.25	20.4%	12.1%	2.4%	.315	—	—	—	—	—	3.27	113	79
Ronald Peña R 2021 · 4.49 FIP	29	SU	4.49	16.5%	10.4%	2.7%	.288	—	—	—	—	—	3.72	187	78
Santiago Casilla R 2009 · 4.44 FIP	29	SU	4.44	15.0%	9.4%	2.6%	.324	3.29	22.1%	13.0%	170	-1.15	2.76	647	78
Tyler Walker R 2005 · 4.19 FIP	29	SU	4.19	19.4%	7.5%	3.2%	.303	3.61	19.7%	11.3%	93	-0.58	2.38	289	78
Adrian Garza R 2017 · 4.47 FIP	29	SU	4.47	16.0%	7.0%	3.4%	.351	5.18	9.7%	4.1%	113	+0.71	3.94	229	78
Francisco Mendoza R 2016 · 3.81 FIP	28	SU	3.81	17.9%	7.7%	2.3%	.344	—	—	—	—	—	3.13	120	77