Nolan Clenney
P Knoxville Smokies| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 27 | MIX2 levels | 37 | 0 | 64 | 5.62 | 3.96 | 27.6% | 9.9% | — | K 23.0% · BB 10.1% · FIP 4.76 | |
| 2024 | 28 | AANYM | 33 | 0 | 54 | 5.37 | 3.16 | 24.8% | 6.2% | — | K 20.1% · BB 6.8% · FIP 4.23 | |
| 2025 | 29 | MIX3 levels | 14 | 0 | 26 | 4.21 | 4.62 | 13.7% | 12.8% | — | K 8.3% · BB 18.3% · FIP 5.65 | |
| 2026 | 30 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2027PROJ | 31 | MLBCHC | — | — | 0 | 5.01 | 5.01 | 18.0% | 11.2% | — | ||
| 2028PROJ31% MLB | 32 | MLBCHC | 5 | 0 | 5 | 5.08 | 5.17 | 18.1% | 11.5% | -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) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2021 | 25 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 17 | 0 | 28 | 113 | 37 | 7 | 2 | 0% | 1.6 | 25.5% | 8.4% | 17.1% | 3.1% | 3.90 | 3.73 | — |
| 2021 | 25 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 17 | 0 | 28 | 113 | 37 | 7 | 2 | 0% | 1.6 | 32.7% | 6.2% | 26.5% | 1.8% | 3.90 | 2.12 | — |
| 2022 | 26 | A+ MLE | Brooklyn Cyclones | 33 | 2 | 68 | 284 | 87 | 22 | 7 | 6% | 2.1 | 23.6% | 8.9% | 14.7% | 3.3% | 4.92 | 4.06 | — |
| 2022 | 26 | A+ RAW | Brooklyn Cyclones | 33 | 2 | 68 | 284 | 87 | 22 | 7 | 6% | 2.1 | 30.6% | 7.7% | 22.9% | 2.5% | 4.92 | 2.85 | — |
| 2023 | 27 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 37 | 0 | 64 | 293 | 81 | 29 | 10 | 0% | 1.7 | 23.0% | 10.1% | 12.9% | 4.2% | 5.62 | 4.76 | — |
| 2023 | 27 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 37 | 0 | 64 | 293 | 81 | 29 | 10 | 0% | 1.7 | 27.6% | 9.9% | 17.7% | 3.4% | 5.62 | 3.96 | — |
| 2024 | 28 | AA MLE | Binghamton Rumble Ponies | 33 | 0 | 54 | 242 | 60 | 15 | 6 | 0% | 1.6 | 20.1% | 6.8% | 13.3% | 3.6% | 5.37 | 4.23 | — |
| 2024 | 28 | AA MLE | Binghamton Rumble Ponies | 33 | 0 | 54 | 242 | 60 | 15 | 6 | 0% | 1.6 | 20.1% | 6.8% | 13.3% | 3.6% | 5.37 | 4.23 | — |
| 2024 | 28 | AA RAW | Binghamton Rumble Ponies | 33 | 0 | 54 | 242 | 60 | 15 | 6 | 0% | 1.6 | 24.8% | 6.2% | 18.6% | 2.5% | 5.37 | 3.16 | — |
| 2025 | 29 | MIX MLE | 3 levels | 14 | 0 | 26 | 117 | 16 | 15 | 2 | 0% | 1.8 | 8.3% | 18.3% | -10.0% | 1.7% | 4.21 | 5.65 | — |
| 2025 | 29 | MIX MLE | 3 levels | 14 | 0 | 26 | 117 | 16 | 15 | 2 | 0% | 1.8 | 8.3% | 18.3% | -10.0% | 1.7% | 4.21 | 5.65 | — |
| 2025 | 29 | MIX RAW | 3 levels | 14 | 0 | 26 | 117 | 16 | 15 | 2 | 0% | 1.8 | 13.7% | 12.8% | 0.9% | 1.7% | 4.21 | 4.62 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 31 | MLB | CHC | — | — | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 18.0% | 11.2% | 6.8% | 3.0% | 5.01 | 5.01 | — |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 32 | MLB MLE | CHC | 15 | 0 | 16 | 67 | 12 | 8 | 2 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.1% | 11.5% | 6.7% | 3.2% | 5.08 | 5.17 | -0.1 |
| 2028 | 32 | MLB CTX | CHC | 5 | 0 | 5 | 21 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.1% | 11.5% | 6.7% | 3.2% | 5.08 | 5.17 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 5 | 0 | 5 | 21 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.1% | 11.4% | 6.7% | 3.2% | 5.08 | 4.79 | -0.0 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 190 | 0 | 200 | 844 | 162 | 81 | 40 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.1% | 11.4% | 6.7% | 3.2% | 5.08 | 4.79 | -0.6 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 134 | 2 | 239 | 1049 | 222 | 102 | 36 | 1% | 1.8 | 21.1% | 9.8% | 11.4% | 3.4% | 5.02 | 4.44 | -0.1 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 112 | 2 | 200 | 879 | 186 | 86 | 30 | 1% | 1.8 | 21.1% | 9.8% | 11.4% | 3.4% | 5.02 | 4.44 | -1.4 | |
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.
2025 AAKnoxville Smokies · 18 IPFIP 5.05 → 5.65 (+0.60)K% 10.3% → 8.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 10.26% | — | ×0.810 | 8.31% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 16.67% | — | ×1.100 | 18.33% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.28% | ÷0.911 | ×1.200 | 1.69% |
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 82).
Result: FIP 5.05 → 5.65, 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 A+South Bend Cubs · 6 IPFIP 3.94 → 4.57 (+0.63)K% 16.7% → 12.8%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 16.67% | — | ×0.770 | 12.83% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 3.33% | — | ×1.150 | 3.83% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.33% | ÷1.106 | ×1.250 | 3.77% |
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 121).
Result: FIP 3.94 → 4.57, 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).
2024 AABinghamton Rumble Ponies · 54 IPFIP 3.15 → 4.23 (+1.07)K% 24.8% → 20.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 24.79% | — | ×0.810 | 20.08% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 6.20% | — | ×1.100 | 6.82% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.48% | ÷0.834 | ×1.200 | 3.57% |
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 67).
Result: FIP 3.15 → 4.23, 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).
2023 AABinghamton Rumble Ponies · 40 IPFIP 4.37 → 5.47 (+1.10)K% 23.3% → 18.9%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 23.28% | — | ×0.810 | 18.86% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.52% | — | ×1.100 | 10.48% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.70% | ÷0.925 | ×1.200 | 4.80% |
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 4.37 → 5.47, 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 AAASyracuse Mets · 24 IPFIP 3.02 → 3.46 (+0.44)K% 35.6% → 30.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 35.58% | — | ×0.860 | 30.60% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 10.58% | — | ×0.900 | 9.52% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.88% | ÷1.003 | ×1.100 | 3.16% |
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 101).
Result: FIP 3.02 → 3.46, 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+Brooklyn Cyclones · 68 IPFIP 2.85 → 4.06 (+1.22)K% 30.6% → 23.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 30.63% | — | ×0.770 | 23.59% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 7.75% | — | ×1.150 | 8.91% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.46% | ÷0.925 | ×1.250 | 3.33% |
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 2.85 → 4.06, 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 ASt. Lucie Mets · 20 IPFIP 2.40 → 3.73 (+1.33)K% 34.5% → 25.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 34.52% | — | ×0.740 | 25.55% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 7.14% | — | ×1.180 | 8.43% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.38% | ÷0.988 | ×1.300 | 3.13% |
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 98).
Result: FIP 2.40 → 3.73, 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+Brooklyn Cyclones · 7 IPFIP 1.21 → 1.81 (+0.60)K% 27.6% → 21.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 27.59% | — | ×0.770 | 21.24% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 3.45% | — | ×1.150 | 3.97% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷0.925 | ×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 85).
Result: FIP 1.21 → 1.81, 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).