Alec Barger

P Hartford Yard Goats

Age 29 RHP 6'2" / 201 lbs AA

Overview

AAPROSPECT

MLB%2%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	26	AACOL	39	0	46	3.52	3.12	22.8%	8.9%	—	K 18.4% · BB 9.8% · FIP 3.85
2025	27	AACOL	29	0	33	5.40	5.35	23.4%	11.7%	—	K 18.9% · BB 12.8% · FIP 5.81
2027PROJ	29	MLBCOL	—	—	0	4.86	4.86	20.4%	11.0%	—
2028PROJ31% MLB	30	MLBCOL	5	0	5	4.91	4.98	20.3%	11.1%	-0.0

Next 2 projected WAR -0.0Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

CompsWirfin Obispo (age 30) · Jim Miller (age 30) · Joe Nelson (age 31)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 125117vR 109

ERA4.86

FIP4.86

K%20.4%

BB%11.0%

K-BB%9.4%

Proj IP21

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 21 IP

Grades · Contract

Scouting Grades

K†5050

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	23	A MLE	Augusta GreenJackets	30	6	60	269	79	31	7	20%	2.0	21.7%	13.6%	8.1%	2.8%	4.50	4.55	—
2021	23	A RAW	Augusta GreenJackets	30	6	60	269	79	31	7	20%	2.0	29.4%	11.5%	17.8%	2.6%	4.50	3.53	—
2022	24	A+ MLE	Rome Braves	38	0	49	222	69	22	5	0%	1.3	23.9%	11.4%	12.5%	3.0%	4.38	4.19	—
2022	24	A+ RAW	Rome Braves	38	0	49	222	69	22	5	0%	1.3	31.1%	9.9%	21.2%	2.3%	4.38	2.96	—
2023	25	AA MLE	Hartford Yard Goats	43	0	53	237	63	31	5	0%	1.2	21.5%	14.4%	7.1%	2.4%	5.60	4.44	—
2023	25	AA RAW	Hartford Yard Goats	43	0	53	237	63	31	5	0%	1.2	26.6%	13.1%	13.5%	2.1%	5.60	3.70	—
2024	26	AA MLE	Hartford Yard Goats	39	0	46	202	46	18	3	0%	1.2	18.4%	9.8%	8.6%	1.9%	3.52	3.85	—
2024	26	AA MLE	Hartford Yard Goats	39	0	46	202	46	18	3	0%	1.2	18.4%	9.8%	8.6%	1.9%	3.52	3.85	—
2024	26	AA RAW	Hartford Yard Goats	39	0	46	202	46	18	3	0%	1.2	22.8%	8.9%	13.9%	1.5%	3.52	3.12	—
2025	27	AA MLE	Hartford Yard Goats	29	0	33	137	32	16	7	0%	1.1	18.9%	12.8%	6.1%	4.9%	5.40	5.81	—
2025	27	AA MLE	Hartford Yard Goats	29	0	33	137	32	16	7	0%	1.1	18.9%	12.8%	6.1%	4.9%	5.40	5.81	—
2025	27	AA RAW	Hartford Yard Goats	29	0	33	137	32	16	7	0%	1.1	23.4%	11.7%	11.7%	5.1%	5.40	5.35	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	29	MLB	COL	—	—	0	—	—	—	—	—	—	20.4%	11.0%	9.4%	3.1%	4.86	4.86	—
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	30	MLB MLE	COL	16	0	17	71	14	8	2	0%	1.1	20.3%	11.1%	9.2%	3.3%	4.91	4.98	-0.1
2028	30	MLB CTX	COL	5	0	5	21	4	2	1	0%	1.0	20.3%	11.1%	9.2%	3.3%	4.91	4.98	-0.0
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		5	0	5	22	5	2	1	0%	1.1	20.3%	11.1%	9.2%	3.3%	4.91	4.60	-0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	190	76	38	0%	1.1	20.3%	11.1%	9.2%	3.3%	4.91	4.60	-0.1
Career	—	MLE		179	6	242	1067	226	133	31	3%	1.4	21.2%	12.5%	8.7%	2.9%	4.66	4.48	-0.1
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		148	5	200	883	187	110	25	3%	1.4	21.2%	12.5%	8.7%	2.9%	4.66	4.48	-1.0

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 AAHartford Yard Goats · 33 IPFIP 5.41 → 5.81 (+0.40)K% 23.4% → 18.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.36%	—	×0.810	18.92%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.68%	—	×1.100	12.85%
HR / BF /BF	5.11%	÷1.255	×1.200	4.88%

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 151).

Result: FIP 5.41 → 5.81, 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 AAHartford Yard Goats · 46 IPFIP 3.12 → 3.85 (+0.73)K% 22.8% → 18.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.77%	—	×0.810	18.45%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.91%	—	×1.100	9.80%
HR / BF /BF	1.49%	÷0.916	×1.200	1.95%

Result: FIP 3.12 → 3.85, 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 AAHartford Yard Goats · 53 IPFIP 3.67 → 4.44 (+0.77)K% 26.6% → 21.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	26.58%	—	×0.810	21.53%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.08%	—	×1.100	14.39%
HR / BF /BF	2.11%	÷1.040	×1.200	2.43%

Result: FIP 3.67 → 4.44, 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+Rome Braves · 49 IPFIP 2.97 → 4.19 (+1.22)K% 31.1% → 23.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	31.08%	—	×0.770	23.93%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.91%	—	×1.150	11.40%
HR / BF /BF	2.25%	÷0.928	×1.250	3.03%

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 86).

Result: FIP 2.97 → 4.19, 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 AAugusta GreenJackets · 60 IPFIP 3.51 → 4.55 (+1.04)K% 29.4% → 21.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.37%	—	×0.740	21.73%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.52%	—	×1.180	13.60%
HR / BF /BF	2.60%	÷1.192	×1.300	2.84%

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 138).

Result: FIP 3.51 → 4.55, 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
Alec Barger (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.86	20.4%	11.0%	3.1%	—	4.98	20.3%	9.2%	17	+0.12	—	—	—
Wirfin Obispo R 2015 · 4.80 FIP	30	SU	4.80	18.6%	12.2%	3.1%	.292	1.31	28.6%	24.5%	126	-3.49	1.30	218	90
Jim Miller R 2012 · 4.56 FIP	30	SU	4.56	20.9%	11.8%	3.1%	.243	3.95	18.8%	14.7%	74	-0.61	3.95	140	87
Joe Nelson R 2006 · 3.91 FIP	31	SU	3.91	22.8%	10.4%	2.6%	.258	4.05	23.4%	12.8%	94	+0.14	3.08	139	86
Dustin Molleken R 2015 · 3.74 FIP	30	SU	3.74	20.4%	11.7%	1.6%	.287	3.90	20.6%	8.4%	77	+0.16	3.38	129	84
Neil Wagner R 2013 · 4.02 FIP	29	SU	4.02	20.5%	7.5%	3.1%	.306	4.05	19.8%	7.5%	43	+0.03	3.11	135	84
Tyler Sturdevant R 2015 · 4.37 FIP	29	SU	4.37	21.3%	8.5%	3.6%	.241	3.97	18.5%	11.9%	118	-0.40	3.44	149	83
Brandon Cunniff R 2017 · 4.79 FIP	28	SU	4.79	20.1%	11.6%	3.5%	.275	6.80	13.9%	-1.9%	30	+2.01	3.89	180	82
Brian Sanches R 2008 · 4.74 FIP	29	SU	4.74	18.5%	9.3%	3.7%	.378	4.01	20.5%	10.8%	182	-0.73	3.39	229	82
Thad Weber R 2013 · 5.18 FIP	28	SU	5.18	16.4%	13.1%	3.3%	.244	4.52	12.2%	6.0%	308	-0.66	4.40	378	81
Diego Moreno R 2016 · 3.75 FIP	29	SU	3.75	21.0%	8.2%	2.5%	.347	3.13	17.8%	11.9%	54	-0.62	2.29	187	81
Joe Colón J R 2017 · 4.25 FIP	27	SU	4.25	20.4%	12.1%	2.4%	.315	—	—	—	—	—	3.27	113	80
Gregory Infante R 2016 · 4.47 FIP	29	SU	4.47	19.0%	12.3%	2.6%	.333	3.43	22.5%	15.8%	120	-1.04	2.97	230	80
Cole McDonald R 2024 · 5.01 FIP	27	SU	5.01	20.9%	12.7%	3.8%	.281	—	—	—	—	—	2.81	153	80
Coleman Huntley III R 2022 · 4.05 FIP	29	SU	4.05	24.4%	10.9%	3.0%	.311	2.38	20.9%	12.6%	25	-1.67	2.38	160	79
Angel Castro R 2015 · 4.50 FIP	32	SU	4.50	15.9%	8.0%	3.1%	.268	4.28	13.6%	5.5%	231	-0.22	3.51	292	79
Tyler Walker R 2005 · 4.19 FIP	29	SU	4.19	19.4%	7.5%	3.2%	.303	3.61	19.7%	11.3%	93	-0.58	2.38	289	79
Carlos Fisher R 2011 · 4.33 FIP	28	SU	4.33	15.5%	9.1%	2.5%	.275	—	—	—	—	—	2.48	245	79
Kevin Gryboski R 2003 · 3.67 FIP	29	SU	3.67	16.8%	8.9%	1.6%	.295	3.92	9.4%	0.2%	82	+0.25	3.67	178	78
Jason Bulger R 2008 · 4.60 FIP	29	SU	4.60	27.4%	12.3%	4.1%	.293	3.94	25.1%	13.3%	90	-0.66	3.78	106	78
Ronald Peña R 2021 · 4.49 FIP	29	SU	4.49	16.5%	10.4%	2.7%	.288	—	—	—	—	—	3.72	187	78