Brad Case

P Altoona Curve

Age 30 RHP 6'7" / 242 lbs AA

Overview

AAPROSPECT

MLB%2%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2022	25	MIX2 levels	36	0	71	4.58	3.61	20.3%	7.8%	—	K 17.2% · BB 8.9% · FIP 4.33
2023	26	MIX5 levels	31	8	49	7.21	5.32	18.2%	14.5%	—	K 15.4% · BB 17.4% · FIP 5.46
2024	27	MIX4 levels	22	2	46	3.74	4.04	13.0%	7.2%	—	K 10.6% · BB 6.1% · FIP 3.96
2025	28	No MLB games played
2026	29	No MLB games played
2027PROJ	30	MLBPIT	—	—	0	4.51	4.51	19.2%	8.1%	—
2028PROJ31% MLB	31	MLBPIT	5	0	5	4.61	4.69	19.2%	8.6%	-0.0

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

Contract

No contract data on file.

CompsYoanner Negrin (age 31) · Rodolfo Aguirre (age 30) · Eder Llamas (age 30)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 119111vR 103

ERA4.51

FIP4.51

K%19.2%

BB%8.1%

K-BB%11.1%

Proj IP21

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 21 IP

Grades · Contract

Scouting Grades

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)
2018	21	ROK MLE	Bristol Pirates	10	8	50	204	38	8	3	80%	5.0	12.7%	4.9%	7.8%	2.1%	3.44	3.78	—
2018	21	ROK RAW	Bristol Pirates	10	8	50	204	38	8	3	80%	5.0	18.6%	3.9%	14.7%	1.5%	3.44	2.84	—
2019	22	MIX MLE	2 levels	24	24	137	562	108	25	17	100%	5.7	14.5%	5.1%	9.4%	3.7%	3.41	4.53	—
2019	22	MIX RAW	2 levels	24	24	137	562	108	25	17	100%	5.7	19.2%	4.4%	14.8%	3.0%	3.41	3.68	—
2021	24	AA MLE	Altoona Curve	28	2	67	301	57	19	13	7%	2.4	15.3%	6.9%	8.4%	5.5%	5.24	5.69	—
2021	24	AA RAW	Altoona Curve	28	2	67	301	57	19	13	7%	2.4	18.9%	6.3%	12.6%	4.3%	5.24	4.77	—
2022	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	36	0	71	320	65	25	7	0%	2.0	17.2%	8.9%	8.3%	2.8%	4.58	4.33	—
2022	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	36	0	71	320	65	25	7	0%	2.0	20.3%	7.8%	12.5%	2.2%	4.58	3.61	—
2023	26	MIX MLE	5 levels	31	8	49	242	44	35	7	26%	1.6	15.4%	17.4%	-2.0%	2.7%	7.21	5.46	—
2023	26	MIX RAW	5 levels	31	8	49	242	44	35	7	26%	1.6	18.2%	14.5%	3.7%	2.9%	7.21	5.32	—
2024	27	MIX MLE	4 levels	22	2	46	207	27	15	4	9%	2.1	10.6%	6.1%	4.4%	1.8%	3.74	3.96	—
2024	27	MIX MLE	4 levels	22	2	46	207	27	15	4	9%	2.1	10.6%	6.1%	4.4%	1.8%	3.74	3.96	—
2024	27	MIX RAW	4 levels	22	2	46	207	27	15	4	9%	2.1	13.0%	7.2%	5.8%	1.9%	3.74	4.04	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	30	MLB	PIT	—	—	0	—	—	—	—	—	—	19.2%	8.1%	11.1%	3.0%	4.51	4.51	—
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	31	MLB MLE	PIT	17	0	17	73	14	6	2	0%	1.0	19.2%	8.6%	10.7%	3.2%	4.61	4.69	-0.0
2028	31	MLB CTX	PIT	5	0	5	21	4	2	1	0%	1.0	19.2%	8.6%	10.7%	3.2%	4.61	4.69	-0.0
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		5	0	5	23	4	2	1	0%	1.1	19.2%	8.6%	10.7%	3.2%	4.61	4.31	+0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	147	73	37	0%	1.1	19.2%	8.6%	10.7%	3.2%	4.61	4.31	+0.6
Career	—	MLE		151	44	419	1836	268	143	60	29%	2.8	14.6%	7.8%	6.8%	3.3%	4.38	4.66	-0.0
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		72	21	200	876	128	68	29	29%	2.8	14.6%	7.8%	6.8%	3.3%	4.38	4.66	-0.3

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 AAAltoona Curve · 37 IPFIP 3.39 → 3.96 (+0.57)K% 13.0% → 10.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	13.04%	—	×0.810	10.57%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	5.59%	—	×1.100	6.15%
HR / BF /BF	1.24%	÷0.844	×1.200	1.77%

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 69).

Result: FIP 3.39 → 3.96, 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 AAAIndianapolis Indians · 5 IPFIP 8.91 → 9.76 (+0.85)K% 4.2% → 3.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	4.17%	—	×0.860	3.58%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.50%	—	×0.900	11.25%
HR / BF /BF	8.33%	÷0.909	×1.100	10.09%

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 82).

Result: FIP 8.91 → 9.76, 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).

2023 AAAltoona Curve · 27 IPFIP 4.12 → 4.68 (+0.56)K% 19.5% → 15.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.53%	—	×0.810	15.82%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.94%	—	×1.100	12.03%
HR / BF /BF	2.34%	÷1.106	×1.200	2.54%

Result: FIP 4.12 → 4.68, 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 · 13 IPFIP 5.93 → 6.81 (+0.87)K% 19.2% → 14.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.18%	—	×0.770	14.77%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	23.29%	—	×1.150	26.78%
HR / BF /BF	2.74%	÷1.202	×1.250	2.85%

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 140).

Result: FIP 5.93 → 6.81, 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).

2023 AAAIndianapolis Indians · 4 IPFIP 8.73 → 8.75 (+0.02)K% 9.5% → 8.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	9.52%	—	×0.860	8.19%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.52%	—	×0.900	8.57%
HR / BF /BF	9.52%	÷1.095	×1.100	9.57%

Result: FIP 8.73 → 8.75, 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 AAAltoona Curve · 62 IPFIP 3.73 → 4.33 (+0.59)K% 21.2% → 17.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	21.25%	—	×0.810	17.21%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.06%	—	×1.100	8.86%
HR / BF /BF	2.56%	÷1.084	×1.200	2.84%

Result: FIP 3.73 → 4.33, 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 AAAIndianapolis Indians · 9 IPFIP 2.65 → 2.84 (+0.19)K% 14.9% → 13.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	14.89%	—	×0.880	13.11%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	6.38%	—	×1.050	6.70%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.013	×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 103).

Result: FIP 2.65 → 2.84, 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 AAAltoona Curve · 67 IPFIP 4.67 → 5.69 (+1.02)K% 18.9% → 15.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	18.94%	—	×0.810	15.34%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	6.31%	—	×1.100	6.94%
HR / BF /BF	4.32%	÷0.947	×1.200	5.47%

Result: FIP 4.67 → 5.69, 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).

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
Brad Case (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.51	19.2%	8.1%	3.0%	—	4.69	19.2%	10.7%	17	+0.18	—	—	—
Yoanner Negrin R 2015 · 3.79 FIP	31	SW	3.79	15.1%	7.5%	1.9%	.256	3.29	15.0%	8.5%	270	-0.50	3.15	485	78
Rodolfo Aguirre R 2015 · 4.29 FIP	30	SW	4.29	12.4%	6.9%	2.5%	.288	4.81	11.4%	1.3%	125	+0.52	3.39	212	74
Eder Llamas R 2016 · 4.12 FIP	30	SW	4.12	11.4%	6.8%	2.0%	.301	3.23	11.3%	4.6%	64	-0.89	3.23	171	73
Cody Satterwhite R 2017 · 4.22 FIP	30	SU	4.22	17.0%	7.1%	3.0%	.310	—	—	—	—	—	3.69	147	71
Felipe Arredondo R 2017 · 4.76 FIP	30	SW	4.76	14.8%	7.3%	3.6%	.311	4.65	16.2%	9.1%	64	-0.11	3.92	337	71
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	70
Murphy Smith R 2018 · 4.57 FIP	30	SW	4.57	13.6%	9.3%	2.6%	.273	—	—	—	—	—	3.16	300	69
Marco Carrillo R 2017 · 5.33 FIP	30	SW	5.33	11.1%	7.4%	4.1%	.278	6.08	9.9%	0.8%	104	+0.75	5.33	194	69
Fredy Quintero R 2017 · 4.45 FIP	29	SW	4.45	14.0%	8.7%	2.6%	.335	4.62	17.2%	3.5%	43	+0.17	4.29	241	69
Willie Eyre R 2007 · 4.53 FIP	29	SU	4.53	13.7%	9.1%	2.6%	.306	2.87	11.1%	5.5%	18	-1.66	2.87	164	67
Ryan Jensen R 2005 · 4.35 FIP	29	SW	4.35	15.7%	5.2%	3.5%	.310	—	—	—	—	—	4.35	253	67
Chris Jakubauskas R 2009 · 4.97 FIP	30	SW	4.97	12.1%	6.2%	3.9%	.250	4.42	15.7%	7.8%	72	-0.55	4.42	165	67
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	66
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	66
Jason Urquidez R 2015 · 3.59 FIP	32	SU	3.59	15.6%	9.3%	1.1%	.386	1.81	25.5%	20.7%	90	-1.78	1.25	123	66
Edgar Alberto Garcia R 2017 · 4.01 FIP	29	SP-	4.01	17.3%	10.9%	1.8%	.305	—	—	—	—	—	4.01	272	66
Mike Broadway R 2017 · 4.73 FIP	30	SU	4.73	18.3%	10.2%	3.4%	.245	4.65	23.0%	12.4%	49	-0.08	1.74	195	66
Francisco Cordova R 2015 · 5.51 FIP	31	SW	5.51	6.4%	4.6%	4.3%	.261	4.59	7.1%	-0.6%	83	-0.92	4.59	115	65
Scott Atchison R 2007 · 4.55 FIP	31	SU	4.55	19.1%	7.6%	3.8%	.297	4.59	16.2%	9.5%	60	+0.04	2.52	340	65
Brian Powell R 2004 · 4.45 FIP	30	SU	4.45	14.5%	7.2%	3.0%	.272	—	—	—	—	—	4.45	212	65