Bryce Hubbart

P Chattanooga Lookouts

Age 26 LHP 5'11" / 190 lbs AA

Overview

AAPROSPECT

MLB%2%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	23	MIX2 levels	23	11	76	5.42	4.71	20.4%	11.7%	—	K 15.5% · BB 13.8% · FIP 5.45
2025	24	MIX2 levels	22	1	46	5.09	3.86	23.5%	13.1%	—	K 17.5% · BB 15.4% · FIP 4.79
2026	25	MIX4 levels	25	1	44	7.16	4.17	28.3%	8.9%	—	K 23.1% · BB 11.4% · FIP 5.59
2027PROJ	26	MLBCIN	—	—	0	5.13	5.13	21.2%	12.7%	—
2028PROJ38% MLB	27	MLBCIN	11	0	12	5.07	5.09	21.4%	12.4%	-0.1

Next 2 projected WAR -0.1Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 -0.1 / P90 0.7, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 95%

CompsJuan Grullon (age 26) · Luis Perez (age 26) · Mitchell Tyranski (age 26)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 114122vR 131

ERA5.13

FIP5.13

K%21.2%

BB%12.7%

K-BB%8.5%

Proj IP25

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 25 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)
2022	21	MIX MLE	2 levels	5	1	7	32	12	6	0	20%	1.5	37.5%	18.8%	18.8%	0.0%	1.23	2.31	—
2022	21	MIX RAW	2 levels	5	1	7	32	12	6	0	20%	1.5	37.5%	18.8%	18.8%	0.0%	1.23	2.28	—
2023	22	A MLE	Daytona Tortugas	16	7	45	222	51	49	3	44%	2.8	17.0%	26.0%	-9.0%	1.7%	4.96	5.87	—
2023	22	A RAW	Daytona Tortugas	16	7	45	222	51	49	3	44%	2.8	23.0%	22.1%	0.9%	1.4%	4.96	4.95	—
2024	23	MIX MLE	2 levels	23	11	76	343	70	40	11	48%	3.3	15.5%	13.8%	1.7%	3.5%	5.42	5.45	—
2024	23	MIX MLE	2 levels	23	11	76	343	70	40	11	48%	3.3	15.5%	13.8%	1.7%	3.5%	5.42	5.45	—
2024	23	MIX RAW	2 levels	23	11	76	343	70	40	11	48%	3.3	20.4%	11.7%	8.7%	3.2%	5.42	4.71	—
2025	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	22	1	46	221	52	29	4	5%	2.1	17.5%	15.4%	2.1%	2.2%	5.09	4.79	—
2025	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	22	1	46	221	52	29	4	5%	2.1	17.5%	15.4%	2.1%	2.2%	5.09	4.79	—
2025	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	22	1	46	221	52	29	4	5%	2.1	23.5%	13.1%	10.4%	1.8%	5.09	3.86	—
2026	25	MIX MLE	4 levels	25	1	44	191	54	17	8	4%	1.8	23.1%	11.4%	11.7%	5.5%	7.16	5.59	—
2026	25	MIX MLE	4 levels	25	1	44	191	54	17	8	4%	1.8	23.1%	11.4%	11.7%	5.5%	7.16	5.59	—
2026	25	MIX RAW	4 levels	25	1	44	191	54	17	8	4%	1.8	28.3%	8.9%	19.4%	4.2%	7.16	4.17	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	26	MLB	CIN	—	—	0	—	—	—	—	—	—	21.2%	12.7%	8.5%	3.3%	5.13	5.13	—
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	27	MLB MLE	CIN	30	0	32	134	29	17	5	0%	1.1	21.4%	12.4%	9.0%	3.4%	5.07	5.09	-0.2
2028	27	MLB CTX	CIN	11	0	12	51	11	6	2	0%	1.1	21.4%	12.4%	9.0%	3.4%	5.07	5.09	-0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		11	0	12	50	11	6	2	0%	1.1	21.4%	12.4%	9.0%	3.4%	5.07	4.71	-0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	184	100	33	0%	1.1	21.4%	12.4%	9.0%	3.4%	5.07	4.71	-0.4
Career	—	MLE		91	21	219	1009	186	167	31	23%	2.4	18.4%	16.6%	1.9%	3.1%	5.47	5.32	-0.2
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		83	19	200	921	170	153	28	23%	2.4	18.4%	16.6%	1.9%	3.1%	5.47	5.32	-1.3

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.

2026 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 36 IPFIP 4.50 → 5.59 (+1.09)K% 28.6% → 23.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.57%	—	×0.810	23.14%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.39%	—	×1.100	11.43%
HR / BF /BF	4.55%	÷1.000	×1.200	5.45%

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 4.50 → 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).

2025 ADaytona Tortugas · 34 IPFIP 3.65 → 4.77 (+1.12)K% 25.4% → 18.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.44%	—	×0.740	18.83%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.61%	—	×1.180	16.06%
HR / BF /BF	1.78%	÷1.032	×1.300	2.24%

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 106).

Result: FIP 3.65 → 4.77, 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 A+Dayton Dragons · 12 IPFIP 4.16 → 4.83 (+0.67)K% 17.3% → 13.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	17.31%	—	×0.770	13.33%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.54%	—	×1.150	13.27%
HR / BF /BF	1.92%	÷1.124	×1.250	2.14%

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 125).

Result: FIP 4.16 → 4.83, 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+Dayton Dragons · 67 IPFIP 4.88 → 5.45 (+0.57)K% 20.1% → 15.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.13%	—	×0.770	15.50%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.01%	—	×1.150	13.81%
HR / BF /BF	3.57%	÷1.285	×1.250	3.47%

Result: FIP 4.88 → 5.45, 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).

2024 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 9 IPFIP 2.26 → 2.73 (+0.48)K% 22.9% → 18.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.86%	—	×0.810	18.51%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.57%	—	×1.100	9.43%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.089	×1.200	0.00%

Result: FIP 2.26 → 2.73, 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 ADaytona Tortugas · 45 IPFIP 4.70 → 5.87 (+1.18)K% 23.0% → 17.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.97%	—	×0.740	17.00%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	22.07%	—	×1.180	26.05%
HR / BF /BF	1.35%	÷1.060	×1.300	1.66%

Result: FIP 4.70 → 5.87, 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 ADaytona Tortugas · 6 IPFIP 1.08 → 2.33 (+1.25)K% 43.5% → 32.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	43.48%	—	×0.740	32.17%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.04%	—	×1.180	15.39%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.883	×1.300	0.00%

Result: FIP 1.08 → 2.33, 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).

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
Bryce Hubbart (OGILVIE)	—	—	5.13	21.2%	12.7%	3.3%	—	5.09	21.4%	9.0%	32	-0.04	—	—	—
Juan Grullon L 2016 · 4.64 FIP	26	SU	4.64	19.8%	10.9%	3.3%	.305	—	—	—	—	—	4.64	134	79
Luis Perez L 2011 · 4.35 FIP	26	SU	4.35	18.4%	8.8%	3.1%	.317	3.32	22.3%	13.2%	42	-1.03	3.32	173	78
Mitchell Tyranski L 2024 · 4.90 FIP	26	SU	4.90	21.0%	12.3%	3.7%	.234	3.46	20.5%	4.0%	57	-1.44	3.46	145	77
Sean Mellen L 2022 · 4.01 FIP	24	SU	4.01	21.3%	10.4%	2.5%	.285	—	—	—	—	—	4.01	101	77
Hector Mercado L 2000 · 4.79 FIP	26	SU	4.79	21.7%	13.3%	3.3%	.270	4.22	22.9%	10.0%	111	-0.57	3.47	125	77
Will Lamb L 2017 · 5.78 FIP	26	SU	5.78	20.0%	14.0%	4.7%	.322	—	—	—	—	—	3.64	178	76
Tyler Holton L 2022 · 4.30 FIP	26	SU	4.30	20.7%	9.8%	3.1%	.288	3.67	21.7%	16.8%	258	-0.63	2.97	439	76
Mike Gosling L 2007 · 4.67 FIP	26	SU	4.67	19.5%	12.2%	3.0%	.346	5.66	11.4%	2.6%	25	+0.99	4.44	116	76
Matt Purke L 2016 · 4.25 FIP	26	SU	4.25	19.1%	13.9%	1.8%	.284	3.54	21.4%	8.8%	112	-0.71	3.01	226	75
Brad Kuntz L 2018 · 4.10 FIP	26	SU	4.10	20.9%	11.7%	2.4%	.352	—	—	—	—	—	2.35	197	75
Wesley Wright L 2010 · 4.85 FIP	25	SW	4.85	19.6%	8.8%	4.2%	.310	3.38	23.9%	16.5%	106	-1.47	3.03	375	75
Matt Thornton L 2004 · 4.18 FIP	27	SU	4.18	20.3%	16.2%	1.4%	.304	4.18	21.8%	11.5%	167	-0.00	1.71	663	75
Will Gilbert L 2019 · 4.42 FIP	25	SU	4.42	19.9%	10.3%	3.1%	.306	—	—	—	—	—	2.92	141	75
Graeme Stinson L 2023 · 4.85 FIP	25	SU	4.85	19.5%	15.6%	2.6%	.302	—	—	—	—	—	3.56	146	75
Kevin Chapman L 2014 · 4.63 FIP	26	SU	4.63	19.6%	11.3%	3.2%	.297	3.30	22.3%	12.4%	137	-1.33	3.01	194	75
Braulio Lara L 2015 · 3.96 FIP	26	SU	3.96	16.7%	8.7%	2.1%	.367	5.20	18.9%	3.9%	67	+1.24	3.96	118	74
Nick Hagadone L 2012 · 4.74 FIP	26	SU	4.74	22.4%	12.9%	3.5%	.310	3.88	24.6%	14.7%	82	-0.86	2.97	141	74
John Bale L 2001 · 4.41 FIP	27	SU	4.41	18.6%	15.0%	1.8%	.219	4.12	19.0%	13.9%	46	-0.29	2.49	168	74
Rob Zastryzny L 2018 · 4.31 FIP	26	SU	4.31	18.4%	11.0%	2.5%	.264	4.81	19.8%	10.8%	142	+0.50	3.31	634	74
Adam Scott L 2022 · 5.27 FIP	26	SW	5.27	21.1%	13.5%	4.1%	.317	4.65	16.1%	-1.2%	46	-0.62	4.17	315	74

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	0.3	28	21.3%	12.5%	1.30	5.10
John Hudek ('99)	1.0	40	23.0%	13.7%	1.30	4.43
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*
Bill Wilson ('69-'73, -0 WAR*)	1.3	52	20.3%*	11.5%*	1.13*	4.84*
Gene Harris ('89-'95, -1 WAR*)	1.2	40	20.0%*	12.5%*	0.98*	4.96*
Armando Almanza ('05)	1.1	54	24.4%	14.3%	1.43	4.82