Ben Harris
P Oklahoma City Comets| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 23 | AALAD | 46 | 0 | 52 | 4.88 | 3.97 | 31.4% | 19.9% | — | K 25.4% · BB 21.9% · FIP 4.76 | |
| 2024 | 24 | MIX2 levels | 42 | 0 | 48 | 5.44 | 4.97 | 29.4% | 19.5% | — | K 23.8% · BB 19.6% · FIP 5.66 | |
| 2025 | 25 | AAALAD | 28 | 2 | 30 | 4.75 | 4.85 | 24.5% | 22.4% | — | K 21.1% · BB 20.2% · FIP 4.74 | |
| 2026 | 26 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2027PROJ | 27 | MLBLAD | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5.29 | 5.29 | 22.1% | 16.7% | -0.0 | ||
| 2028PROJ43% MLB | 28 | MLBLAD | 7 | 0 | 7 | 5.24 | 5.28 | 22.1% | 16.1% | -0.1 | ||
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 | 21 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 6 | 0 | 5 | 31 | 9 | 6 | 1 | 0% | 0.9 | 29.0% | 19.4% | 9.7% | 3.2% | 6.75 | 4.87 | — |
| 2021 | 21 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 6 | 0 | 5 | 31 | 9 | 6 | 1 | 0% | 0.9 | 29.0% | 19.4% | 9.7% | 3.2% | 6.75 | 5.54 | — |
| 2022 | 22 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 44 | 3 | 56 | 238 | 107 | 37 | 2 | 7% | 1.3 | 33.9% | 18.2% | 15.7% | 1.0% | 3.72 | 3.06 | — |
| 2022 | 22 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 44 | 3 | 56 | 238 | 107 | 37 | 2 | 7% | 1.3 | 45.0% | 15.5% | 29.4% | 0.8% | 3.72 | 1.72 | — |
| 2023 | 23 | AA MLE | Tulsa Drillers | 46 | 0 | 52 | 236 | 74 | 47 | 4 | 0% | 1.1 | 25.4% | 21.9% | 3.5% | 1.9% | 4.88 | 4.76 | — |
| 2023 | 23 | AA RAW | Tulsa Drillers | 46 | 0 | 52 | 236 | 74 | 47 | 4 | 0% | 1.1 | 31.4% | 19.9% | 11.4% | 1.7% | 4.88 | 3.97 | — |
| 2024 | 24 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 42 | 0 | 48 | 221 | 65 | 43 | 7 | 0% | 1.1 | 23.8% | 19.6% | 4.2% | 3.8% | 5.44 | 5.66 | — |
| 2024 | 24 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 42 | 0 | 48 | 221 | 65 | 43 | 7 | 0% | 1.1 | 23.8% | 19.6% | 4.2% | 3.8% | 5.44 | 5.66 | — |
| 2024 | 24 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 42 | 0 | 48 | 221 | 65 | 43 | 7 | 0% | 1.1 | 29.4% | 19.5% | 10.0% | 3.2% | 5.44 | 4.97 | — |
| 2025 | 25 | AAA MLE | Oklahoma City Comets | 28 | 2 | 30 | 147 | 36 | 33 | 2 | 7% | 1.1 | 21.1% | 20.2% | 0.9% | 1.6% | 4.75 | 4.74 | — |
| 2025 | 25 | AAA MLE | Oklahoma City Comets | 28 | 2 | 30 | 147 | 36 | 33 | 2 | 7% | 1.1 | 21.1% | 20.2% | 0.9% | 1.6% | 4.75 | 4.74 | — |
| 2025 | 25 | AAA RAW | Oklahoma City Comets | 28 | 2 | 30 | 147 | 36 | 33 | 2 | 7% | 1.1 | 24.5% | 22.4% | 2.0% | 1.4% | 4.75 | 4.85 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 27 | MLB | LAD | 2 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 22.1% | 16.7% | 5.4% | 2.9% | 5.29 | 5.29 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 28 | MLB MLE | LAD | 15 | 0 | 15 | 65 | 14 | 10 | 2 | 0% | 1.0 | 22.1% | 16.1% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 5.24 | 5.28 | -0.1 |
| 2028 | 28 | MLB CTX | LAD | 7 | 0 | 7 | 30 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 0% | 1.0 | 22.1% | 16.1% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 5.24 | 5.28 | -0.1 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 6 | 0 | 7 | 28 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0% | 1.1 | 22.1% | 16.1% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 5.24 | 4.90 | -0.0 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 190 | 0 | 200 | 844 | 183 | 122 | 31 | 0% | 1.1 | 22.1% | 16.1% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 5.24 | 4.90 | -0.8 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 166 | 5 | 191 | 873 | 233 | 174 | 18 | 3% | 1.2 | 26.7% | 19.9% | 6.8% | 2.1% | 4.71 | 4.53 | -0.1 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 174 | 5 | 200 | 914 | 244 | 182 | 19 | 3% | 1.2 | 26.7% | 19.9% | 6.8% | 2.1% | 4.71 | 4.53 | -1.7 | |
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 AAAOklahoma City Comets · 30 IPFIP 4.62 → 4.74 (+0.12)K% 24.5% → 21.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 24.49% | — | ×0.860 | 21.06% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 22.45% | — | ×0.900 | 20.20% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.36% | ÷0.956 | ×1.100 | 1.57% |
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 91).
Result: FIP 4.62 → 4.74, 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 AATulsa Drillers · 46 IPFIP 4.72 → 5.66 (+0.93)K% 29.3% → 23.8%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 29.33% | — | ×0.810 | 23.75% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 17.79% | — | ×1.100 | 19.57% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.37% | ÷1.063 | ×1.200 | 3.80% |
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 113).
Result: FIP 4.72 → 5.66, 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 AATulsa Drillers · 52 IPFIP 3.91 → 4.76 (+0.86)K% 31.4% → 25.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 31.36% | — | ×0.810 | 25.40% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 19.92% | — | ×1.100 | 21.91% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.69% | ÷1.083 | ×1.200 | 1.88% |
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 117).
Result: FIP 3.91 → 4.76, 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 ARancho Cucamonga Quakes · 28 IPFIP 1.81 → 3.24 (+1.42)K% 46.1% → 34.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 46.09% | — | ×0.740 | 34.11% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 17.19% | — | ×1.180 | 20.28% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.78% | ÷1.247 | ×1.300 | 0.81% |
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 149).
Result: FIP 1.81 → 3.24, 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).
2022 A+Great Lakes Loons · 28 IPFIP 1.64 → 2.87 (+1.22)K% 43.6% → 33.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 43.64% | — | ×0.770 | 33.60% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 13.64% | — | ×1.150 | 15.68% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.91% | ÷1.013 | ×1.250 | 1.12% |
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 103).
Result: FIP 1.64 → 2.87, 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 ARancho Cucamonga Quakes · 4 IPFIP 4.64 → 6.51 (+1.88)K% 31.8% → 23.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 31.82% | — | ×0.740 | 23.55% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 13.64% | — | ×1.180 | 16.09% |
| HR / BF /BF | 4.55% | ÷0.965 | ×1.300 | 6.13% |
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 93).
Result: FIP 4.64 → 6.51, 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).