James Gonzalez

P Las Vegas Aviators

Age 26 LHP 6'2" / 255 lbs AAA peak 0.4 · 2027

Overview

AAAPROSPECT

ETA2028MLB%10%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	23	MIX3 levels	27	18	121	3.41	3.19	21.8%	7.5%	—	K 17.9% · BB 8.4% · FIP 3.85
2025	24	AAOAK	17	17	78	4.27	3.32	24.4%	10.3%	—	K 19.8% · BB 11.3% · FIP 3.98
2026	25	MIX2 levels	43	5	75	5.64	4.11	19.7%	11.6%	—	K 16.7% · BB 11.1% · FIP 4.38
2027PROJ	26	MLBOAK	7	0	7	4.94	4.94	17.1%	11.4%	-0.0
2028PROJ43% MLB	27	MLBOAK	23	0	24	4.90	4.91	17.7%	11.2%	-0.1
2029PROJ63% MLB	28	MLBOAK	30	0	31	4.92	4.95	18.0%	11.2%	-0.1

Next 3 projected WAR -0.3Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Scouting grades · 20-80

Stuff45Control45Command45

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 -0.3 / P90 0.9, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 95%

CompsIrwin Delgado (age 26) · Matt Tracy (age 26) · Connor Oliver (age 23)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 111119vR 127

ERA4.94

FIP4.94

K%17.1%

BB%11.4%

K-BB%5.7%

Proj IP70

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 70 IP

Grades · Contract

Scouting Grades

STUF4545

CTRL4545

CMD4545

K†4045

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)
2019	18	ROK MLE	DSL Athletics	7	4	19	80	22	5	1	57%	2.7	18.7%	7.8%	10.9%	1.7%	4.82	3.47	—
2019	18	ROK RAW	DSL Athletics	7	4	19	80	22	5	1	57%	2.7	27.5%	6.2%	21.3%	1.2%	4.82	2.24	—
2021	20	MIX MLE	2 levels	10	4	28	116	27	6	1	40%	2.8	18.7%	6.2%	12.5%	0.0%	2.25	2.31	—
2021	20	MIX RAW	2 levels	10	4	28	116	27	6	1	40%	2.8	23.3%	5.2%	18.1%	0.9%	2.25	2.28	—
2022	21	MIX MLE	2 levels	22	15	79	359	76	36	12	68%	3.6	16.6%	11.2%	5.4%	4.5%	6.15	5.59	—
2022	21	MIX RAW	2 levels	22	15	79	359	76	36	12	68%	3.6	21.2%	10.0%	11.1%	3.3%	6.15	4.52	—
2023	22	MIX MLE	2 levels	24	19	108	479	135	46	11	79%	4.5	21.0%	11.3%	9.8%	3.2%	4.42	4.49	—
2023	22	MIX RAW	2 levels	24	19	108	479	135	46	11	79%	4.5	28.2%	9.6%	18.6%	2.3%	4.42	3.20	—
2024	23	MIX MLE	3 levels	27	18	121	505	110	38	9	67%	4.5	17.9%	8.4%	9.6%	2.2%	3.41	3.85	—
2024	23	MIX MLE	3 levels	27	18	121	505	110	38	9	67%	4.5	17.9%	8.4%	9.6%	2.2%	3.41	3.85	—
2024	23	MIX RAW	3 levels	27	18	121	505	110	38	9	67%	4.5	21.8%	7.5%	14.3%	1.8%	3.41	3.19	—
2025	24	AA MLE	Midland RockHounds	17	17	78	340	83	35	6	100%	4.6	19.8%	11.3%	8.5%	2.0%	4.27	3.98	—
2025	24	AA MLE	Midland RockHounds	17	17	78	340	83	35	6	100%	4.6	19.8%	11.3%	8.5%	2.0%	4.27	3.98	—
2025	24	AA RAW	Midland RockHounds	17	17	78	340	83	35	6	100%	4.6	24.4%	10.3%	14.1%	1.8%	4.27	3.32	—
2026	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	43	5	75	335	66	39	7	12%	1.7	16.7%	11.1%	5.5%	2.3%	5.64	4.38	—
2026	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	43	5	75	335	66	39	7	12%	1.7	16.7%	11.1%	5.5%	2.3%	5.64	4.38	—
2026	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	43	5	75	335	66	39	7	12%	1.7	19.7%	11.6%	8.1%	2.1%	5.64	4.11	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	26	MLB	OAK	7	0	7	30	5	3	1	0%	1.0	17.1%	11.4%	5.7%	2.7%	4.94	4.94	-0.0
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	27	MLB MLE	OAK	54	0	56	238	42	27	7	0%	1.0	17.7%	11.2%	6.4%	2.7%	4.90	4.91	-0.2
2029	28	MLB MLE	OAK	47	0	50	209	38	23	6	0%	1.1	18.0%	11.2%	6.7%	2.9%	4.92	4.95	-0.2
2030	29	MLB MLE	OAK	43	0	45	190	34	22	6	0%	1.0	18.0%	11.4%	6.7%	3.0%	4.99	5.05	-0.3
2028	27	MLB CTX	OAK	23	0	24	101	18	11	3	0%	1.0	17.7%	11.2%	6.4%	2.7%	4.90	4.91	-0.1
2029	28	MLB CTX	OAK	30	0	31	131	24	15	4	0%	1.0	18.0%	11.2%	6.7%	2.9%	4.92	4.95	-0.1
2030	29	MLB CTX	OAK	31	0	33	139	25	16	4	0%	1.1	18.0%	11.4%	6.7%	3.0%	4.99	5.05	-0.2
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		83	0	88	370	66	42	11	0%	1.1	17.9%	11.3%	6.6%	2.9%	4.94	4.60	-0.1
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	151	96	25	0%	1.1	17.9%	11.3%	6.6%	2.9%	4.94	4.60	-0.1
Career	—	MLE		150	82	508	2214	411	226	59	55%	3.4	18.6%	10.2%	8.4%	2.6%	4.50	4.28	+0.8
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		59	32	200	872	162	89	23	55%	3.4	18.6%	10.2%	8.4%	2.6%	4.50	4.28	+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.

2026 AAALas Vegas Aviators · 57 IPFIP 4.21 → 4.43 (+0.22)K% 19.1% → 16.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.12%	—	×0.860	16.45%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.16%	—	×0.900	10.04%
HR / BF /BF	2.39%	÷1.000	×1.100	2.63%

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 100).

Result: FIP 4.21 → 4.43, 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).

2026 AAMidland RockHounds · 18 IPFIP 3.60 → 4.24 (+0.64)K% 21.4% → 17.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	21.43%	—	×0.810	17.36%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.10%	—	×1.100	14.40%
HR / BF /BF	1.19%	÷1.000	×1.200	1.43%

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 100).

Result: FIP 3.60 → 4.24, 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).

2025 AAMidland RockHounds · 78 IPFIP 3.31 → 3.98 (+0.67)K% 24.4% → 19.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.41%	—	×0.810	19.77%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.29%	—	×1.100	11.32%
HR / BF /BF	1.76%	÷1.043	×1.200	2.03%

Result: FIP 3.31 → 3.98, 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 AAMidland RockHounds · 97 IPFIP 3.08 → 3.72 (+0.64)K% 21.4% → 17.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	21.39%	—	×0.810	17.33%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.71%	—	×1.100	9.58%
HR / BF /BF	1.24%	÷0.940	×1.200	1.59%

Result: FIP 3.08 → 3.72, 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 A+Lansing Lugnuts · 21 IPFIP 3.05 → 4.48 (+1.43)K% 27.1% → 20.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	27.06%	—	×0.770	20.84%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	2.35%	—	×1.150	2.71%
HR / BF /BF	3.53%	÷0.867	×1.250	5.09%

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 73).

Result: FIP 3.05 → 4.48, 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 AStockton Ports · 87 IPFIP 3.44 → 4.82 (+1.38)K% 27.3% → 20.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	27.34%	—	×0.740	20.23%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.86%	—	×1.180	10.46%
HR / BF /BF	2.78%	÷0.945	×1.300	3.83%

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 89).

Result: FIP 3.44 → 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).

2023 A+Lansing Lugnuts · 21 IPFIP 2.04 → 2.92 (+0.87)K% 32.1% → 24.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	32.14%	—	×0.770	24.75%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.10%	—	×1.150	15.06%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.209	×1.250	0.00%

Result: FIP 2.04 → 2.92, 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 AStockton Ports · 71 IPFIP 4.32 → 5.59 (+1.28)K% 22.5% → 16.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.47%	—	×0.740	16.63%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.49%	—	×1.180	11.20%
HR / BF /BF	3.48%	÷1.003	×1.300	4.51%

Result: FIP 4.32 → 5.59, 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).

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
James Gonzalez (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.94	17.1%	11.4%	2.7%	—	4.96	17.9%	6.6%	151	+0.02	—	—	—
Irwin Delgado L 2015 · 4.77 FIP	26	SW	4.77	14.4%	9.6%	3.0%	.349	3.53	16.2%	7.6%	237	-1.24	3.52	383	86
Matt Tracy L 2015 · 3.96 FIP	26	SW	3.96	14.4%	9.8%	1.5%	.306	4.10	14.7%	5.5%	208	+0.14	3.24	298	85
Connor Oliver L 2024 · 4.34 FIP	23	SW	4.34	17.3%	12.1%	2.1%	.314	6.07	19.2%	3.4%	165	+1.73	4.34	244	84
Brian Burres L 2007 · 4.50 FIP	26	SW	4.50	17.2%	11.6%	2.5%	.328	4.71	11.3%	3.1%	209	+0.21	4.50	344	83
Brian Duensing L 2009 · 3.98 FIP	26	SW	3.98	14.8%	8.4%	1.9%	.286	3.90	15.2%	9.3%	401	-0.08	2.57	799	82
Ben Holmes L 2018 · 4.02 FIP	26	SW	4.02	19.1%	9.3%	2.5%	.264	5.57	19.7%	8.6%	61	+1.55	3.09	451	82
Nick Dombkowski L 2024 · 4.92 FIP	25	SW	4.92	16.5%	10.9%	3.3%	.273	5.17	18.2%	10.6%	183	+0.25	3.71	425	81
Mark Manfredi Sr. L 2024 · 4.60 FIP	24	SW	4.60	22.0%	14.9%	2.7%	.289	3.22	25.4%	11.6%	128	-1.38	2.91	204	80
Dan Meyer L 2007 · 4.76 FIP	26	SP-	4.76	13.9%	11.4%	2.5%	.316	4.35	20.6%	11.8%	86	-0.41	3.73	112	80
Carlos Teller L 2015 · 3.75 FIP	28	SP-	3.75	13.8%	10.9%	0.8%	.329	4.75	13.3%	3.1%	187	+1.00	3.75	333	78
Chris Reed L 2016 · 4.67 FIP	26	SW	4.67	16.4%	9.8%	3.1%	.238	—	—	—	—	—	4.67	137	77
Justin Marks L 2015 · 4.60 FIP	27	SP-	4.60	15.4%	10.5%	2.7%	.323	3.88	19.0%	9.1%	216	-0.72	3.83	324	77
Houston Harding L 2024 · 4.54 FIP	26	SP-	4.54	16.5%	11.2%	2.6%	.268	5.19	12.0%	0.5%	61	+0.65	3.41	239	76
Jack Snodgrass L 2015 · 4.66 FIP	27	SP-	4.66	12.6%	10.7%	2.3%	.278	5.01	15.7%	5.6%	45	+0.35	4.66	118	75
Brian Holmes L 2017 · 5.91 FIP	26	SW	5.91	15.5%	11.7%	4.8%	.354	—	—	—	—	—	3.60	205	74
Eric DuBose L 2003 · 3.92 FIP	27	SP-	3.92	14.4%	7.5%	2.0%	.233	5.49	13.7%	0.4%	104	+1.57	3.92	178	74
Eric Wooten L 2015 · 4.02 FIP	25	SP-	4.02	14.6%	7.5%	2.2%	.316	—	—	—	—	—	4.02	116	73
Matt Walker L 2023 · 4.73 FIP	25	SP-	4.73	12.7%	10.0%	2.6%	.333	—	—	—	—	—	4.21	156	73
Nate Peterson L 2024 · 5.51 FIP	24	SP-	5.51	19.2%	11.4%	4.7%	.296	4.75	16.0%	3.7%	148	-0.76	4.27	315	73
Danny Wirchansky L 2024 · 4.47 FIP	27	SP-	4.47	16.2%	7.4%	3.3%	.246	5.88	13.0%	0.2%	68	+1.41	4.47	179	73

Career Comps

Completed MLB careers (no pro action in 2+ yrs) whose totals — actual + projected — most resemble this player's. Pool: 1,234 reliever careers (754 from 1990-2025 + 480 historical, 1901-2023), also matched on career-to-date at the same age. * Historical (Lahman) careers: rates era-adjusted to 2001-24 league levels; WAR is an OGILVIE proxy.

Player	162s	IP/yr	K%	BB%	HR/9	ERA
OGILVIE CAREER PROJECTION	1.1	55	17.6%	11.3%	1.08	4.94
Mike Matthews ('05)	1.2	61	16.3%	11.3%	1.07	4.54
Tyler Yates ('09)	1.2	62	19.7%	12.0%	0.94	5.12
Bill Wilson ('69-'73, -0 WAR*)	1.3	52	20.3%*	11.5%*	1.13*	4.84*
Valerio De Los Santos ('08)	1.3	51	18.7%	11.5%	1.30	4.57
Fred Lasher ('63-'71, -1 WAR*)	1.0	50	21.5%*	11.9%*	1.05*	4.68*
Kevin Hickey ('81-'91, 0 WAR*)	1.2	47	17.7%*	10.2%*	1.10*	4.27*