Jack Carey

P Akron RubberDucks

Age 27 RHP 6'0" / 205 lbs AA

Overview

AAPROSPECT

ETA2029MLB%2%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	24	MIX2 levels	35	61	3.38	4.05	20.3%	9.4%	—	K 15.6% · BB 11.3% · FIP 5.32
2025	25	MIX2 levels	44	57	3.63	2.91	27.6%	9.6%	—	K 21.8% · BB 11.0% · FIP 3.79
2026	26	MIX2 levels	25	38	4.78	4.72	18.0%	18.5%	—	K 16.0% · BB 19.6% · FIP 5.07
2027PROJ	27	MLBCLE	1	1	5.35	5.35	18.1%	14.9%	-0.0
2028PROJ38% MLB	28	MLBCLE	15	16	5.30	5.33	18.5%	14.5%	-0.1
2029PROJ56% MLB	29	MLBCLE	18	19	5.32	5.39	18.6%	14.3%	-0.2

Next 3 projected WAR -0.3Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Scouting grades · 20-80

Stuff50Control45Command50

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 0.0 / P90 0.0, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 99%

CompsArmando Rivero (age 27) · Julian Arballo (age 27) · Spencer Bivens (age 28)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 135127vR 119

ERA5.35

FIP5.35

K%18.1%

BB%14.9%

K-BB%3.1%

Proj IP60

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 60 IP

Grades · Contract

Scouting Grades

STUF5050

CTRL4545

CMD5050

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	21	MIX MLE	2 levels	4	0	5	22	5	2	0	0%	1.3	22.7%	9.1%	13.6%	0.0%	5.06	2.33	—
2021	21	MIX RAW	2 levels	4	0	5	22	5	2	0	0%	1.3	22.7%	9.1%	13.6%	0.0%	5.06	2.35	—
2022	22	A+ MLE	Greensboro Grasshoppers	33	4	61	284	62	27	9	12%	1.8	16.8%	10.9%	5.9%	3.1%	5.75	4.77	—
2022	22	A+ RAW	Greensboro Grasshoppers	33	4	61	284	62	27	9	12%	1.8	21.8%	9.5%	12.3%	3.2%	5.75	4.31	—
2023	23	MIX MLE	2 levels	40	2	53	230	63	23	5	5%	1.3	20.8%	11.6%	9.2%	1.9%	4.44	3.86	—
2023	23	MIX RAW	2 levels	40	2	53	230	63	23	5	5%	1.3	27.4%	10.0%	17.4%	2.2%	4.44	3.25	—
2024	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	35	0	61	266	54	25	7	0%	1.8	15.6%	11.3%	4.3%	3.8%	3.38	5.32	—
2024	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	35	0	61	266	54	25	7	0%	1.8	15.6%	11.3%	4.3%	3.8%	3.38	5.32	—
2024	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	35	0	61	266	54	25	7	0%	1.8	20.3%	9.4%	10.9%	2.6%	3.38	4.05	—
2025	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	44	0	57	239	66	23	4	0%	1.3	21.8%	11.0%	10.8%	2.1%	3.63	3.79	—
2025	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	44	0	57	239	66	23	4	0%	1.3	21.8%	11.0%	10.8%	2.1%	3.63	3.79	—
2025	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	44	0	57	239	66	23	4	0%	1.3	27.6%	9.6%	18.0%	1.7%	3.63	2.91	—
2026	26	MIX MLE	2 levels	25	0	38	178	32	33	2	0%	1.5	16.0%	19.6%	-3.6%	1.5%	4.78	5.07	—
2026	26	MIX MLE	2 levels	25	0	38	178	32	33	2	0%	1.5	16.0%	19.6%	-3.6%	1.5%	4.78	5.07	—
2026	26	MIX RAW	2 levels	25	0	38	178	32	33	2	0%	1.5	18.0%	18.5%	-0.6%	1.1%	4.78	4.72	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	27	MLB	CLE	1	0	1	4	1	1	0	0%	1.0	18.1%	14.9%	3.1%	2.7%	5.35	5.35	-0.0
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	28	MLB MLE	CLE	40	0	42	179	33	26	5	0%	1.1	18.5%	14.5%	4.0%	2.9%	5.30	5.33	-0.4
2029	29	MLB MLE	CLE	33	0	35	148	28	21	4	0%	1.1	18.6%	14.3%	4.3%	3.0%	5.32	5.39	-0.3
2028	28	MLB CTX	CLE	15	0	16	68	12	10	2	0%	1.1	18.5%	14.5%	4.0%	2.9%	5.30	5.33	-0.1
2029	29	MLB CTX	CLE	18	0	19	80	15	12	2	0%	1.1	18.6%	14.3%	4.3%	3.0%	5.32	5.39	-0.2
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		34	0	35	150	28	22	4	0%	1.0	18.6%	14.4%	4.1%	3.0%	5.31	4.98	-0.2
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	158	124	23	0%	1.1	18.6%	14.4%	4.1%	3.0%	5.31	4.98	-1.0
Career	—	MLE		181	6	275	1219	223	151	31	3%	1.5	18.3%	12.4%	5.9%	2.5%	4.39	4.53	-0.7
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		132	4	200	887	162	110	23	3%	1.5	18.3%	12.4%	5.9%	2.5%	4.39	4.53	-1.9

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.

2026 AAAkron RubberDucks · 33 IPFIP 4.39 → 5.07 (+0.68)K% 19.7% → 16.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.75%	—	×0.810	15.99%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	17.83%	—	×1.100	19.62%
HR / BF /BF	1.27%	÷1.000	×1.200	1.53%

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 100).

Result: FIP 4.39 → 5.07, 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).

2026 AAAColumbus Clippers · 4 IPFIP 5.71 → 5.47 (−0.25)K% 4.8% → 4.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	4.76%	—	×0.860	4.10%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	23.81%	—	×0.900	21.43%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.000	×1.100	0.00%

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 5.71 → 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).

2025 A+Greensboro Grasshoppers · 55 IPFIP 2.88 → 3.79 (+0.91)K% 28.3% → 21.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.26%	—	×0.770	21.76%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.57%	—	×1.150	11.00%
HR / BF /BF	1.74%	÷1.048	×1.250	2.07%

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 110).

Result: FIP 2.88 → 3.79, 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 AAAltoona Curve · 50 IPFIP 4.25 → 5.32 (+1.06)K% 19.3% → 15.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.28%	—	×0.810	15.62%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.31%	—	×1.100	11.35%
HR / BF /BF	2.69%	÷0.844	×1.200	3.83%

Result: FIP 4.25 → 5.32, 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 A+Greensboro Grasshoppers · 11 IPFIP 2.81 → 3.56 (+0.75)K% 25.6% → 19.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.58%	—	×0.770	19.70%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.65%	—	×1.150	5.35%
HR / BF /BF	2.33%	÷1.106	×1.250	2.63%

Result: FIP 2.81 → 3.56, 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 A+Greensboro Grasshoppers · 51 IPFIP 3.10 → 3.86 (+0.76)K% 27.1% → 20.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	27.06%	—	×0.770	20.84%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.09%	—	×1.150	11.61%
HR / BF /BF	1.83%	÷1.202	×1.250	1.91%

Result: FIP 3.10 → 3.86, 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+Greensboro Grasshoppers · 61 IPFIP 4.20 → 4.77 (+0.57)K% 21.8% → 16.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	21.83%	—	×0.770	16.81%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.51%	—	×1.150	10.93%
HR / BF /BF	3.17%	÷1.273	×1.250	3.11%

Result: FIP 4.20 → 4.77, 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
Jack Carey (OGILVIE)	—	—	5.35	18.1%	14.9%	2.7%	—	5.36	18.5%	4.1%	77	+0.01	—	—	—
Armando Rivero R 2015 · 4.29 FIP	27	SU	4.29	18.7%	13.5%	1.9%	.256	2.70	32.9%	19.8%	68	-1.59	2.70	125	89
Julian Arballo R 2015 · 5.13 FIP	27	SU	5.13	15.1%	13.8%	2.8%	.335	4.46	12.6%	0.6%	116	-0.67	4.45	214	89
Spencer Bivens R 2022 · 4.86 FIP	28	SU	4.86	19.8%	13.5%	3.1%	.265	3.85	18.1%	10.3%	272	-1.01	3.52	391	87
Gregory Infante R 2015 · 4.54 FIP	28	SU	4.54	16.9%	15.7%	1.6%	.290	3.78	21.3%	12.7%	181	-0.76	2.97	230	86
Derek Eitel R 2015 · 4.35 FIP	27	SU	4.35	18.1%	13.9%	1.8%	.338	4.26	19.7%	5.0%	113	-0.09	3.96	138	85
Grant Black R 2021 · 4.46 FIP	27	SW	4.46	19.0%	13.9%	2.2%	.327	5.35	15.0%	3.8%	156	+0.89	4.46	215	84
Theo Denlinger R 2023 · 4.19 FIP	27	SU	4.19	20.1%	15.1%	1.6%	.266	4.23	15.3%	9.9%	41	+0.04	2.92	140	84
Roman Phansalkar R 2024 · 5.39 FIP	26	SU	5.39	15.8%	13.2%	3.6%	.294	4.33	18.2%	3.7%	31	-1.06	4.33	164	84
Nolan Riggs R 2018 · 4.49 FIP	25	SU	4.49	20.7%	14.0%	2.5%	.300	—	—	—	—	—	2.36	132	84
Francisco Rodriguez R 2010 · 4.33 FIP	27	SU	4.33	17.2%	11.0%	2.4%	.283	5.00	11.9%	3.4%	14	+0.67	3.16	334	84
Chris Jefferson R 2024 · 5.65 FIP	27	SU	5.65	16.4%	13.6%	4.0%	.308	—	—	—	—	—	3.53	140	84
Luis Mateo R 2017 · 4.60 FIP	27	SU	4.60	17.6%	11.2%	2.9%	.309	5.55	8.6%	-4.8%	43	+0.95	3.48	160	84
Kevin Gryboski R 2002 · 5.02 FIP	28	SU	5.02	13.9%	13.4%	2.5%	.263	3.83	12.0%	2.9%	126	-1.19	3.67	178	83
Jake Gilbert R 2022 · 4.65 FIP	25	SU	4.65	18.2%	16.2%	1.9%	.331	—	—	—	—	—	4.14	103	83
David Goforth R 2016 · 4.68 FIP	27	SU	4.68	14.5%	12.8%	2.1%	.333	4.52	13.9%	4.6%	122	-0.16	3.98	256	83
Brad Goldberg R 2017 · 4.38 FIP	27	SU	4.38	18.4%	15.4%	1.6%	.331	3.14	30.3%	13.3%	36	-1.24	3.14	197	83
Brad Schreiber R 2017 · 4.23 FIP	26	SU	4.23	17.3%	12.7%	1.8%	.312	—	—	—	—	—	3.81	171	83
Haden Erbe R 2024 · 5.28 FIP	25	SU	5.28	18.4%	16.5%	3.0%	.320	5.19	17.8%	0.5%	40	-0.09	5.19	116	83
Nelson Gonzalez R 2017 · 5.00 FIP	27	SU	5.00	15.3%	13.7%	2.6%	.239	5.79	17.4%	6.7%	96	+0.79	3.42	258	82
David Holman R 2017 · 5.53 FIP	27	SU	5.53	15.6%	12.7%	3.9%	.324	5.45	9.6%	0.5%	107	-0.08	5.28	129	82

Career Comps

Completed MLB careers (no pro action in 2+ yrs) whose totals — actual + projected — most resemble this player's. Pool: 1,234 reliever careers (754 from 1990-2025 + 480 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	0.7	46	18.3%	14.7%	1.10	5.33
Richie Lewis ('98)	1.5	59	18.1%	14.1%	1.38	4.88
Matt Anderson ('05)	1.3	51	19.3%	13.5%	1.05	5.19
Doug Bochtler ('00)	1.3	65	18.6%	14.4%	1.25	4.57
Gene Harris ('89-'95, -1 WAR*)	1.2	40	20.0%*	12.5%*	0.98*	4.96*
Dwayne Henry ('84-'95, -1 WAR*)	1.7	67	23.8%*	14.2%*	0.90*	5.02*
Fred Lasher ('63-'71, -1 WAR*)	1.0	50	21.5%*	11.9%*	1.05*	4.68*