Thomas Ponticelli
P Albuquerque Isotopes| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 25 | MIX2 levels | 39 | 9 | 71 | 4.04 | 4.18 | 20.5% | 10.7% | — | K 17.0% · BB 11.6% · FIP 4.82 | |
| 2023 | 26 | AAACLE | 44 | 5 | 64 | 4.64 | 4.30 | 19.5% | 9.9% | — | K 16.7% · BB 8.9% · FIP 4.40 | |
| 2024 | 27 | AAACOL | 10 | 8 | 28 | 14.96 | 10.55 | 7.4% | 17.9% | — | K 6.4% · BB 16.1% · FIP 8.34 | |
| 2025 | 28 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2026 | 29 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2027PROJ | 30 | MLBCOL | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5.36 | 5.36 | 16.1% | 11.7% | -0.0 | ||
| 2028PROJ37% MLB | 31 | MLBCOL | 6 | 0 | 6 | 5.38 | 5.46 | 16.4% | 11.8% | -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) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2018 | 21 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 12 | 3 | 28 | 120 | 35 | 4 | 1 | 25% | 2.4 | 20.1% | 3.6% | 16.5% | 1.3% | 2.54 | 2.59 | — |
| 2018 | 21 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 12 | 3 | 28 | 120 | 35 | 4 | 1 | 25% | 2.4 | 29.2% | 3.3% | 25.8% | 0.8% | 2.54 | 1.51 | — |
| 2019 | 22 | A MLE | Lake County Captains | 24 | 12 | 92 | 412 | 73 | 46 | 15 | 50% | 3.8 | 13.1% | 13.2% | -0.1% | 4.8% | 5.07 | 6.29 | — |
| 2019 | 22 | A RAW | Lake County Captains | 24 | 12 | 92 | 412 | 73 | 46 | 15 | 50% | 3.8 | 17.7% | 11.2% | 6.6% | 3.6% | 5.07 | 5.13 | — |
| 2021 | 24 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 28 | 12 | 91 | 377 | 82 | 32 | 8 | 43% | 3.3 | 17.2% | 9.7% | 7.5% | 3.0% | 2.96 | 4.50 | — |
| 2021 | 24 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 28 | 12 | 91 | 377 | 82 | 32 | 8 | 43% | 3.3 | 21.8% | 8.5% | 13.3% | 2.1% | 2.96 | 3.49 | — |
| 2022 | 25 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 39 | 9 | 71 | 308 | 63 | 33 | 8 | 23% | 1.8 | 17.0% | 11.6% | 5.4% | 3.1% | 4.04 | 4.82 | — |
| 2022 | 25 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 39 | 9 | 71 | 308 | 63 | 33 | 8 | 23% | 1.8 | 20.5% | 10.7% | 9.7% | 2.6% | 4.04 | 4.18 | — |
| 2023 | 26 | AAA MLE | Columbus Clippers | 44 | 5 | 64 | 293 | 57 | 29 | 8 | 11% | 1.5 | 16.7% | 8.9% | 7.8% | 2.9% | 4.64 | 4.40 | — |
| 2023 | 26 | AAA RAW | Columbus Clippers | 44 | 5 | 64 | 293 | 57 | 29 | 8 | 11% | 1.5 | 19.5% | 9.9% | 9.6% | 2.7% | 4.64 | 4.30 | — |
| 2024 | 27 | AAA MLE | Albuquerque Isotopes | 10 | 8 | 28 | 162 | 12 | 29 | 11 | 80% | 2.8 | 6.4% | 16.1% | -9.7% | 6.8% | 14.96 | 8.34 | — |
| 2024 | 27 | AAA MLE | Albuquerque Isotopes | 10 | 8 | 28 | 162 | 12 | 29 | 11 | 80% | 2.8 | 6.4% | 16.1% | -9.7% | 6.8% | 14.96 | 8.34 | — |
| 2024 | 27 | AAA RAW | Albuquerque Isotopes | 10 | 8 | 28 | 162 | 12 | 29 | 11 | 80% | 2.8 | 7.4% | 17.9% | -10.5% | 6.8% | 14.96 | 10.55 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 30 | MLB | COL | 2 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 16.1% | 11.7% | 4.4% | 3.2% | 5.36 | 5.36 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 31 | MLB MLE | COL | 15 | 0 | 15 | 65 | 11 | 8 | 2 | 0% | 1.0 | 16.4% | 11.8% | 4.6% | 3.4% | 5.38 | 5.46 | -0.2 |
| 2028 | 31 | MLB CTX | COL | 6 | 0 | 6 | 25 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0% | 1.0 | 16.4% | 11.8% | 4.6% | 3.4% | 5.38 | 5.46 | -0.1 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 5 | 0 | 6 | 24 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0% | 1.1 | 16.4% | 11.8% | 4.6% | 3.4% | 5.38 | 5.08 | -0.0 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 190 | 0 | 200 | 844 | 142 | 107 | 36 | 0% | 1.1 | 16.4% | 11.8% | 4.6% | 3.4% | 5.38 | 5.08 | -1.2 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 157 | 49 | 375 | 1672 | 255 | 183 | 61 | 31% | 2.4 | 15.2% | 10.9% | 4.3% | 3.7% | 4.82 | 5.22 | -0.2 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 84 | 26 | 200 | 892 | 136 | 98 | 33 | 31% | 2.4 | 15.2% | 10.9% | 4.3% | 3.7% | 4.82 | 5.22 | -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.
2024 AAAAlbuquerque Isotopes · 28 IPFIP 8.47 → 8.34 (−0.12)K% 7.4% → 6.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 7.41% | — | ×0.860 | 6.37% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 17.90% | — | ×0.900 | 16.11% |
| HR / BF /BF | 6.79% | ÷1.096 | ×1.100 | 6.82% |
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 119).
Result: FIP 8.47 → 8.34, 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 AAAColumbus Clippers · 64 IPFIP 4.21 → 4.40 (+0.20)K% 19.5% → 16.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 19.45% | — | ×0.860 | 16.73% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.90% | — | ×0.900 | 8.91% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.73% | ÷1.037 | ×1.100 | 2.90% |
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 107).
Result: FIP 4.21 → 4.40, 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 AAAkron RubberDucks · 48 IPFIP 4.53 → 5.35 (+0.82)K% 20.5% → 16.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 20.47% | — | ×0.810 | 16.58% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 8.84% | — | ×1.100 | 9.72% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.72% | ÷1.014 | ×1.200 | 4.41% |
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 103).
Result: FIP 4.53 → 5.35, 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 AAAColumbus Clippers · 23 IPFIP 3.28 → 3.58 (+0.30)K% 20.4% → 18.0%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 20.43% | — | ×0.880 | 17.98% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 15.05% | — | ×1.050 | 15.81% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷1.001 | ×1.100 | 0.00% |
Factors used: pitcher AAA level factors — K ×0.88, BB ×1.05, 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 3.28 → 3.58, 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 AAAkron RubberDucks · 87 IPFIP 3.64 → 4.50 (+0.87)K% 21.2% → 17.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 21.21% | — | ×0.810 | 17.18% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 8.82% | — | ×1.100 | 9.70% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.20% | ÷0.893 | ×1.200 | 2.96% |
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 79).
Result: FIP 3.64 → 4.50, 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).
2019 ALake County Captains · 92 IPFIP 5.02 → 6.29 (+1.27)K% 17.7% → 13.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 17.72% | — | ×0.740 | 13.11% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 11.17% | — | ×1.180 | 13.17% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.64% | ÷0.990 | ×1.300 | 4.78% |
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 5.02 → 6.29, 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).
2018 ROKAZL Indians 1 · 24 IPFIP 1.49 → 2.59 (+1.10)K% 29.5% → 20.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 29.52% | — | ×0.680 | 20.08% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 2.86% | — | ×1.250 | 3.57% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.95% | ÷1.000 | ×1.400 | 1.33% |
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 100).
Result: FIP 1.49 → 2.59, 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).