Justin Evans

P Jupiter Hammerheads

Age 30 RHP 6'0" / 185 lbs A

Overview

APROSPECT

MLB%0%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2022	25	MIX2 levels	34	0	50	2.50	2.62	30.3%	12.7%	—	K 23.6% · BB 14.3% · FIP 3.63
2023	26	AAMIA	3	0	2	21.60	6.10	18.2%	27.3%	—	K 18.2% · BB 27.3% · FIP 5.02
2024	27	AMIA	12	0	14	2.51	3.87	22.2%	20.6%	—	K 16.4% · BB 24.3% · FIP 4.80
2025	28	No MLB games played
2026	29	No MLB games played
2027PROJ	30	MLBMIA	—	—	0	4.70	4.70	22.9%	11.9%	—
2028PROJ30% MLB	31	MLBMIA	5	0	5	4.78	4.86	22.5%	12.0%	-0.0

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

Contract

No contract data on file.

CompsJoe Nelson (age 31) · Wirfin Obispo (age 30) · Jim Miller (age 30)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 122114vR 106

ERA4.70

FIP4.70

K%22.9%

BB%11.9%

K-BB%10.9%

Proj IP8

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 8 IP

Grades · Contract

Scouting Grades

K†5555

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	24	MIX MLE	3 levels	34	0	45	212	53	24	8	0%	1.3	19.2%	11.2%	8.0%	4.5%	6.40	5.38	—
2021	24	MIX RAW	3 levels	34	0	45	212	53	24	8	0%	1.3	25.0%	11.3%	13.7%	3.8%	6.40	4.66	—
2022	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	34	0	50	221	67	28	2	0%	1.5	23.6%	14.3%	9.2%	1.3%	2.50	3.63	—
2022	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	34	0	50	221	67	28	2	0%	1.5	30.3%	12.7%	17.6%	0.9%	2.50	2.62	—
2023	26	AA MLE	Pensacola Blue Wahoos	3	0	2	11	2	3	0	0%	0.6	18.2%	27.3%	-9.1%	0.0%	21.60	5.02	—
2023	26	AA RAW	Pensacola Blue Wahoos	3	0	2	11	2	3	0	0%	0.6	18.2%	27.3%	-9.1%	0.0%	21.60	6.10	—
2024	27	A MLE	Jupiter Hammerheads	12	0	14	63	14	13	0	0%	1.2	16.4%	24.3%	-7.9%	0.0%	2.51	4.80	—
2024	27	A MLE	Jupiter Hammerheads	12	0	14	63	14	13	0	0%	1.2	16.4%	24.3%	-7.9%	0.0%	2.51	4.80	—
2024	27	A RAW	Jupiter Hammerheads	12	0	14	63	14	13	0	0%	1.2	22.2%	20.6%	1.6%	0.0%	2.51	3.87	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	30	MLB	MIA	—	—	0	—	—	—	—	—	—	22.9%	11.9%	10.9%	3.0%	4.70	4.70	—
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	31	MLB MLE	MIA	16	0	17	73	16	9	2	0%	1.1	22.5%	12.0%	10.5%	3.2%	4.78	4.86	-0.1
2028	31	MLB CTX	MIA	5	0	5	21	5	3	1	0%	1.0	22.5%	12.0%	10.5%	3.2%	4.78	4.86	-0.0
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		5	0	5	22	5	3	1	0%	1.0	22.5%	12.0%	10.5%	3.2%	4.78	4.48	+0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	193	116	39	0%	1.1	22.5%	12.0%	10.5%	3.2%	4.78	4.48	+0.2
Career	—	MLE		83	0	111	507	105	74	12	0%	1.3	20.7%	14.6%	6.2%	2.4%	4.37	4.53	-0.1
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		149	0	200	911	189	133	22	0%	1.3	20.7%	14.6%	6.2%	2.4%	4.37	4.53	-0.7

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 AJupiter Hammerheads · 14 IPFIP 3.84 → 4.80 (+0.96)K% 22.2% → 16.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.22%	—	×0.740	16.44%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	20.63%	—	×1.180	24.35%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.888	×1.300	0.00%

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 78).

Result: FIP 3.84 → 4.80, 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+Beloit Sky Carp · 39 IPFIP 2.36 → 3.45 (+1.09)K% 32.2% → 24.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	32.16%	—	×0.770	24.77%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.53%	—	×1.150	12.11%
HR / BF /BF	1.17%	÷0.885	×1.250	1.65%

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 77).

Result: FIP 2.36 → 3.45, 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 AAPensacola Blue Wahoos · 11 IPFIP 3.61 → 4.25 (+0.64)K% 24.0% → 19.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.00%	—	×0.810	19.44%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	20.00%	—	×1.100	22.00%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.048	×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 110).

Result: FIP 3.61 → 4.25, 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 A+Beloit Snappers · 26 IPFIP 4.97 → 6.00 (+1.04)K% 23.3% → 17.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.26%	—	×0.770	17.91%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.08%	—	×1.150	11.59%
HR / BF /BF	4.65%	÷1.082	×1.250	5.37%

Result: FIP 4.97 → 6.00, 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 AJupiter Hammerheads · 14 IPFIP 2.66 → 3.95 (+1.30)K% 29.8% → 22.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.82%	—	×0.740	22.07%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.77%	—	×1.180	10.35%
HR / BF /BF	1.75%	÷0.891	×1.300	2.56%

Result: FIP 2.66 → 3.95, 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 AAPensacola Blue Wahoos · 5 IPFIP 6.19 → 7.24 (+1.06)K% 23.1% → 18.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.08%	—	×0.810	18.69%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	23.08%	—	×1.100	25.38%
HR / BF /BF	3.85%	÷1.011	×1.200	4.57%

Result: FIP 6.19 → 7.24, 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
Justin Evans (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.70	22.9%	11.9%	3.0%	—	4.86	22.5%	10.5%	17	+0.16	—	—	—
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	85
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	85
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	84
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	81
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	80
Esteban Haro R 2016 · 4.55 FIP	30	SU	4.55	17.1%	10.2%	2.9%	.338	3.83	11.6%	6.3%	75	-0.72	3.76	164	77
Erik Davis R 2017 · 4.25 FIP	30	SU	4.25	22.2%	11.1%	3.0%	.349	3.52	17.4%	8.5%	65	-0.73	3.05	227	77
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	74
Hirokazu Sawamura R 2021 · 4.48 FIP	33	SU	4.48	26.2%	11.2%	4.0%	.263	4.02	18.1%	6.8%	51	-0.46	4.02	104	74
Andrew Robinson R 2017 · 4.32 FIP	29	SU	4.32	23.4%	8.8%	3.8%	.245	—	—	—	—	—	3.19	160	73
Leonel Campos R 2017 · 3.70 FIP	30	SU	3.70	25.7%	11.8%	2.3%	.241	—	—	—	—	—	2.62	168	73
Dalier Hinojosa R 2016 · 4.30 FIP	30	SU	4.30	18.7%	12.6%	2.2%	.329	—	—	—	—	—	3.41	104	72
Jose Manuel Lopez R 2015 · 5.21 FIP	30	SU	5.21	18.6%	7.6%	4.9%	.373	3.56	18.5%	9.3%	93	-1.65	3.50	170	72
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	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	71
Javy Guerra R 2016 · 4.29 FIP	30	SU	4.29	21.3%	13.9%	2.3%	.303	3.95	19.5%	13.0%	193	-0.34	2.94	409	71
Jeremy Fikac R 2004 · 4.91 FIP	29	SU	4.91	19.6%	8.0%	4.5%	.276	—	—	—	—	—	3.10	136	71
Cody Hall R 2018 · 3.92 FIP	30	SU	3.92	25.9%	17.5%	1.5%	.244	—	—	—	—	—	3.51	134	71
Marc Magliaro R 2018 · 3.94 FIP	28	SU	3.94	19.6%	7.3%	2.9%	.307	—	—	—	—	—	3.94	125	71
Scott Dohmann R 2008 · 4.38 FIP	30	SU	4.38	18.2%	9.1%	3.0%	.348	—	—	—	—	—	4.28	173	71