Jay Schuyler
| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | PA | AVG/OBP/SLG | HR | SB | wRC+ | WAR | MLE AVG/OBP/SLG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 21 | ROKBillings Must… | 230 | .272/.377/.319 | 1 | 5 | 47 | — | .207/.278/.241 |
| 2019 | 22 | ACIN | 440 | .260/.339/.351 | 5 | 5 | 48 | — | .206/.263/.278 |
| 2021 | 24 | AACIN | 136 | .182/.267/.256 | 1 | 0 | 15 | — | .145/.215/.202 |
Career Stats + Projections
Methodology▸ how these numbers are built
All seasons translated to park-neutral MLB-equivalent (MLE) and combined per year. 2027 = full-season projection (no games played yet). 2028+ via Advanced Marcel + aging curve. Catcher framing: only 2027 Statcast framing is modeled (Baseball Savant server-caches the leaderboard to the current season); prior-year framing is unmodeled — projections for established framers may run 1-3 WAR low.
| Year | Age | Lvl | Team | MLB% | PA | AB | H | 2B | 3B | HR | BB | SO | HBP | SB | CS | AVG | OBP | SLG | OPS | ISO | BABIP | K% | BB% | wOBA | wRC+ | BAT | RUN | FLD | POS | REP | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ Career — actual stats, one row per stint (as recorded, no adjustments) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2018 | 21 | ROK | Billings Mustangs | — | 230 | 191 | 52 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 28 | 31 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 272 | 377 | 319 | 696 | 47 | 309 | 13 | 12 | 317 | 47 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 22 | A | Dayton Dragons | — | 440 | 388 | 101 | 16 | 2 | 5 | 41 | 75 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 260 | 339 | 351 | 689 | 90 | 308 | 17 | 9 | 311 | 48 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 24 | AA | Chattanooga Lookouts | — | 136 | 121 | 22 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 11 | 49 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 182 | 267 | 256 | 523 | 74 | 292 | 36 | 8 | 244 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| ▸ Career — adjusted (every ACTUAL line translated to park/league-neutral MLB equivalents) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2018 | 21 | ROK MLE | Billings Mustangs | — | 230 | 203 | 42 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 45 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 207 | 278 | 241 | 519 | 34 | 241 | 20 | 7 | 237 | 47 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 22 | A MLE | Dayton Dragons | — | 440 | 403 | 83 | 13 | 2 | 4 | 26 | 107 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 206 | 263 | 278 | 541 | 72 | 259 | 24 | 6 | 239 | 48 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 24 | AA MLE | Chattanooga Lookouts | — | 136 | 124 | 18 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 57 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 145 | 215 | 202 | 416 | 56 | 254 | 42 | 6 | 191 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2018 | 21 | ROK MLE | Billings Mustangs | — | 230 | 203 | 42 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 45 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 207 | 278 | 241 | 519 | 34 | 252 | 20 | 7 | 237 | 47 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2018 | 21 | ROK RAW | Billings Mustangs | — | 230 | 191 | 52 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 28 | 31 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 272 | 377 | 319 | 696 | 47 | 309 | 13 | 12 | 317 | 47 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 22 | A MLE | Dayton Dragons | — | 440 | 403 | 83 | 13 | 2 | 4 | 26 | 107 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 206 | 263 | 278 | 541 | 72 | 267 | 24 | 6 | 239 | 48 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 22 | A RAW | Dayton Dragons | — | 440 | 388 | 101 | 16 | 2 | 5 | 41 | 75 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 260 | 339 | 351 | 689 | 90 | 308 | 17 | 9 | 311 | 48 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 24 | AA MLE | Chattanooga Lookouts | — | 136 | 124 | 18 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 57 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 145 | 215 | 202 | 416 | 56 | 254 | 42 | 6 | 191 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 24 | AA RAW | Chattanooga Lookouts | — | 136 | 121 | 22 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 11 | 49 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 182 | 267 | 256 | 523 | 74 | 292 | 36 | 8 | 244 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2018 | 21 | ROK MLE | Billings Mustangs | — | 230 | 208 | 42 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 45 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 202 | 278 | 236 | 514 | 34 | 241 | 20 | 7 | 237 | 47 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 22 | A MLE | Dayton Dragons | — | 440 | 406 | 83 | 13 | 2 | 4 | 26 | 107 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 204 | 263 | 276 | 539 | 71 | 259 | 24 | 6 | 239 | 48 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 24 | AA MLE | Chattanooga Lookouts | — | 136 | 124 | 18 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 57 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 145 | 215 | 202 | 416 | 56 | 254 | 42 | 6 | 191 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| ▸ Career Totals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | MLE | — | 806 | 730 | 143 | 21 | 2 | 6 | 50 | 209 | 12 | 10 | 9 | 196 | 259 | 255 | 514 | 59 | 260 | 26 | 6 | 230 | 42 | -56 | -2 | +0 | +14 | +17 | -2.6 | |
| / 162G | — | MLE | — | 650 | 589 | 116 | 17 | 2 | 5 | 40 | 169 | 10 | 8 | 7 | 197 | 260 | 258 | 518 | 61 | 262 | 26 | 6 | 230 | 42 | -45 | -1 | +0 | +12 | +14 | -2.1 | |
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.
2021 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 136 PAwOBA .240 → .191 (−49)K% 36.0% → 42.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | GB/FB × | Age × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /PA | 36.03% | ÷1.040 | ×1.220 | — | — | 42.25% |
| BB% (unintentional) /PA | 8.09% | ÷0.936 | ×0.690 | — | ×1.012 | 6.03% |
| HBP% /PA | 2.21% | — | ×0.850 | — | ×1.012 | 1.90% |
| Singles /BIP | 20.83% | ÷1.011 | ×0.940 | ×0.989 | ×1.012 | 19.38% |
| Doubles /BIP | 8.33% | ÷1.183 | ×0.870 | ×0.989 | ×1.012 | 6.13% |
| Triples /BIP | 0.00% | ÷0.912 | ×0.920 | ×0.989 | ×1.012 | 0.00% |
| Home runs /BIP | 1.39% | ÷0.950 | ×0.780 | — | ×1.012 | 1.15% |
Factors used: level-wide AA factors (no league-specific row for this league/era). Park (home-season share, regressed): HR 90, 1B 102, 2B 137, 3B 82, K 108, BB 87 — applied at half strength. Age: age 24 vs a level average of 24.8 → +1.2% on BB/HBP/hit rates (0.8 yr younger than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×0.989.
Result: wOBA .240 → .191; ISO .074 → .054; BABIP .292 → .254. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).
2019 ADayton Dragons · 440 PAwOBA .306 → .239 (−67)K% 17.0% → 24.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | GB/FB × | Age × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /PA | 17.05% | ÷0.953 | ×1.360 | — | — | 24.33% |
| BB% (unintentional) /PA | 9.09% | ÷1.044 | ×0.690 | — | — | 6.01% |
| HBP% /PA | 1.14% | — | ×0.780 | — | — | 0.89% |
| Singles /BIP | 24.92% | ÷1.033 | ×0.920 | ×0.950 | — | 21.09% |
| Doubles /BIP | 5.11% | ÷0.950 | ×0.830 | ×0.950 | — | 4.24% |
| Triples /BIP | 0.64% | ÷1.024 | ×0.910 | ×0.950 | — | 0.54% |
| Home runs /BIP | 1.60% | ÷0.950 | ×0.800 | — | — | 1.34% |
Factors used: level-wide A factors (no league-specific row for this league/era). Park (home-season share, regressed): HR 90, 1B 107, 2B 90, 3B 105, K 91, BB 109 — applied at half strength. Age: age 22 vs a level average of 22.0 → +0.0% on BB/HBP/hit rates (0.0 yr younger than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×0.950.
Result: wOBA .306 → .239; ISO .090 → .073; BABIP .308 → .259. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).
2018 ROKBillings Mustangs · 230 PAwOBA .317 → .237 (−80)K% 13.5% → 19.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | GB/FB × | Age × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /PA | 13.48% | ÷1.000 | ×1.440 | — | — | 19.41% |
| BB% (unintentional) /PA | 11.74% | ÷1.000 | ×0.610 | — | ×0.985 | 7.05% |
| HBP% /PA | 1.74% | — | ×0.720 | — | ×0.985 | 1.23% |
| Singles /BIP | 28.12% | ÷1.000 | ×0.820 | ×0.981 | ×0.985 | 22.28% |
| Doubles /BIP | 3.75% | ÷1.000 | ×0.720 | ×0.981 | ×0.985 | 2.61% |
| Triples /BIP | 0.00% | ÷1.000 | ×0.720 | ×0.981 | ×0.985 | 0.00% |
| Home runs /BIP | 0.62% | ÷1.000 | ×0.750 | — | ×0.985 | 0.46% |
Factors used: league row PIO. Park (home-season share, regressed): no park row on file (treated as neutral) — applied at half strength. Age: age 21 vs a level average of 19.5 → −1.5% on BB/HBP/hit rates (1.5 yr older than average). Ground-ball/fly-ball mix moves 1B/2B/3B by ×0.981.
Result: wOBA .317 → .237; ISO .047 → .035; BABIP .309 → .241. Both wOBAs use the same linear weights, so the change is the translation alone. The MLE line is not regressed to the mean — regression happens later, when seasons are blended into a projection (how).