Keyshawn Askew
P Montgomery Biscuits| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 23 | MIX2 levels | 35 | 9 | 97 | 3.99 | 2.78 | 31.0% | 11.0% | — | K 24.1% · BB 12.4% · FIP 3.70 | |
| 2024 | 24 | AATB | 51 | 0 | 64 | 1.40 | 2.87 | 23.7% | 14.0% | — | K 19.2% · BB 15.4% · FIP 3.43 | |
| 2025 | 25 | AATB | 29 | 0 | 34 | 6.29 | 4.47 | 17.3% | 20.8% | — | K 14.0% · BB 22.9% · FIP 4.82 | |
| 2026 | 26 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2027PROJ | 27 | MLBTB | — | — | 0 | 5.55 | 5.55 | 18.1% | 17.3% | — | ||
| 2028PROJ38% MLB | 28 | MLBTB | 7 | 0 | 7 | 5.48 | 5.51 | 18.5% | 16.6% | -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 | ROK MLE | FCL Mets | 4 | 1 | 9 | 35 | 14 | 4 | 1 | 25% | 2.2 | 40.0% | 11.4% | 28.6% | 2.9% | 1.00 | 2.74 | — |
| 2021 | 21 | ROK RAW | FCL Mets | 4 | 1 | 9 | 35 | 14 | 4 | 1 | 25% | 2.2 | 40.0% | 11.4% | 28.6% | 2.9% | 1.00 | 2.77 | — |
| 2022 | 22 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 18 | 8 | 66 | 269 | 92 | 28 | 3 | 44% | 3.7 | 25.6% | 12.2% | 13.4% | 1.5% | 2.44 | 3.32 | — |
| 2022 | 22 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 18 | 8 | 66 | 269 | 92 | 28 | 3 | 44% | 3.7 | 34.2% | 10.4% | 23.8% | 1.1% | 2.44 | 2.18 | — |
| 2023 | 23 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 35 | 9 | 97 | 420 | 130 | 46 | 7 | 26% | 2.8 | 24.1% | 12.4% | 11.7% | 1.9% | 3.99 | 3.70 | — |
| 2023 | 23 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 35 | 9 | 97 | 420 | 130 | 46 | 7 | 26% | 2.8 | 31.0% | 11.0% | 20.0% | 1.7% | 3.99 | 2.78 | — |
| 2024 | 24 | AA MLE | Montgomery Biscuits | 51 | 0 | 64 | 278 | 66 | 39 | 0 | 0% | 1.3 | 19.2% | 15.4% | 3.8% | 0.0% | 1.40 | 3.43 | — |
| 2024 | 24 | AA MLE | Montgomery Biscuits | 51 | 0 | 64 | 278 | 66 | 39 | 0 | 0% | 1.3 | 19.2% | 15.4% | 3.8% | 0.0% | 1.40 | 3.43 | — |
| 2024 | 24 | AA RAW | Montgomery Biscuits | 51 | 0 | 64 | 278 | 66 | 39 | 0 | 0% | 1.3 | 23.7% | 14.0% | 9.7% | 0.0% | 1.40 | 2.87 | — |
| 2025 | 25 | AA MLE | Montgomery Biscuits | 29 | 0 | 34 | 168 | 29 | 35 | 0 | 0% | 1.2 | 14.0% | 22.9% | -8.9% | 0.0% | 6.29 | 4.82 | — |
| 2025 | 25 | AA MLE | Montgomery Biscuits | 29 | 0 | 34 | 168 | 29 | 35 | 0 | 0% | 1.2 | 14.0% | 22.9% | -8.9% | 0.0% | 6.29 | 4.82 | — |
| 2025 | 25 | AA RAW | Montgomery Biscuits | 29 | 0 | 34 | 168 | 29 | 35 | 0 | 0% | 1.2 | 17.3% | 20.8% | -3.6% | 0.0% | 6.29 | 4.47 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 27 | MLB | TB | — | — | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 18.1% | 17.3% | 0.8% | 2.6% | 5.55 | 5.55 | — |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 28 | MLB MLE | TB | 17 | 0 | 18 | 74 | 14 | 12 | 2 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.5% | 16.6% | 1.9% | 2.7% | 5.48 | 5.51 | -0.2 |
| 2028 | 28 | MLB CTX | TB | 7 | 0 | 7 | 30 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.5% | 16.6% | 1.9% | 2.7% | 5.48 | 5.51 | -0.1 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 6 | 0 | 7 | 28 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.5% | 16.6% | 1.9% | 2.7% | 5.48 | 5.13 | -0.0 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 190 | 0 | 200 | 844 | 152 | 152 | 30 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.5% | 16.6% | 1.9% | 2.7% | 5.48 | 5.13 | -1.4 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 137 | 18 | 271 | 1170 | 261 | 170 | 13 | 13% | 2.0 | 22.3% | 14.6% | 7.7% | 1.1% | 3.19 | 3.68 | -0.2 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 101 | 13 | 200 | 863 | 193 | 126 | 10 | 13% | 2.0 | 22.3% | 14.6% | 7.7% | 1.1% | 3.19 | 3.68 | -2.2 | |
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 AAMontgomery Biscuits · 34 IPFIP 4.28 → 4.82 (+0.54)K% 17.3% → 14.0%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 17.26% | — | ×0.810 | 13.98% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 20.83% | — | ×1.100 | 22.92% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷0.922 | ×1.200 | 0.00% |
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 84).
Result: FIP 4.28 → 4.82, 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 AAMontgomery Biscuits · 64 IPFIP 2.87 → 3.43 (+0.56)K% 23.7% → 19.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 23.74% | — | ×0.810 | 19.23% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 14.03% | — | ×1.100 | 15.43% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷0.958 | ×1.200 | 0.00% |
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 92).
Result: FIP 2.87 → 3.43, 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+Bowling Green Hot Rods · 75 IPFIP 2.66 → 3.64 (+0.99)K% 32.2% → 24.8%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 32.20% | — | ×0.770 | 24.79% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.91% | — | ×1.150 | 11.39% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.86% | ÷1.066 | ×1.250 | 2.18% |
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 113).
Result: FIP 2.66 → 3.64, 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 AAMontgomery Biscuits · 22 IPFIP 3.23 → 3.90 (+0.67)K% 26.8% → 21.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 26.80% | — | ×0.810 | 21.71% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 14.43% | — | ×1.100 | 15.88% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.03% | ÷1.087 | ×1.200 | 1.14% |
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 3.23 → 3.90, 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 ASt. Lucie Mets · 47 IPFIP 2.37 → 3.69 (+1.32)K% 34.4% → 25.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 34.41% | — | ×0.740 | 25.46% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 10.22% | — | ×1.180 | 12.05% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.61% | ÷0.949 | ×1.300 | 2.21% |
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 90).
Result: FIP 2.37 → 3.69, 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 · 20 IPFIP 1.62 → 2.49 (+0.86)K% 33.7% → 26.0%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 33.73% | — | ×0.770 | 25.98% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 10.84% | — | ×1.150 | 12.47% |
| 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 1.62 → 2.49, 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 ROKFCL Mets · 9 IPFIP 2.74 → 4.90 (+2.17)K% 40.0% → 27.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 40.00% | — | ×0.680 | 27.20% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 11.43% | — | ×1.250 | 14.29% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.86% | ÷0.958 | ×1.400 | 4.17% |
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 92).
Result: FIP 2.74 → 4.90, 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).