Edgar Barclay
P Somerset Patriots| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 25 | MIX2 levels | 21 | 10 | 78 | 3.91 | 4.22 | 29.0% | 12.8% | — | K 24.2% · BB 12.1% · FIP 4.67 | |
| 2024 | 26 | AAAScranton/Wilk… | 29 | 29 | 143 | 5.98 | 5.65 | 18.2% | 10.8% | — | K 15.7% · BB 9.7% · FIP 5.68 | |
| 2025 | 27 | MIX2 levels | 5 | 4 | 17 | 3.12 | 3.56 | 22.2% | 12.5% | — | K 21.2% · BB 14.4% · FIP 4.18 | |
| 2026 | 28 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2027PROJ | 29 | MLBNYY | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5.08 | 5.08 | 18.0% | 10.4% | -0.0 | ||
| 2028PROJ31% MLB | 30 | MLBNYY | 6 | 0 | 6 | 5.11 | 5.18 | 18.2% | 10.5% | -0.0 | ||
Grades · Contract
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
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 | 21 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 12 | 0 | 26 | 111 | 29 | 8 | 0 | 0% | 2.2 | 17.9% | 6.9% | 11.1% | 0.0% | 2.08 | 2.46 | — |
| 2019 | 21 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 12 | 0 | 26 | 111 | 29 | 8 | 0 | 0% | 2.2 | 26.1% | 7.2% | 18.9% | 0.0% | 2.08 | 1.79 | — |
| 2021 | 23 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 29 | 6 | 77 | 316 | 112 | 25 | 7 | 21% | 2.7 | 26.6% | 9.3% | 17.3% | 2.8% | 3.49 | 3.56 | — |
| 2021 | 23 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 29 | 6 | 77 | 316 | 112 | 25 | 7 | 21% | 2.7 | 35.4% | 7.9% | 27.5% | 2.2% | 3.49 | 2.35 | — |
| 2022 | 24 | A+ MLE | Hudson Valley Renegades | 28 | 4 | 67 | 257 | 86 | 20 | 0 | 14% | 2.4 | 25.8% | 8.9% | 16.8% | 0.0% | 1.74 | 2.06 | — |
| 2022 | 24 | A+ RAW | Hudson Valley Renegades | 28 | 4 | 67 | 257 | 86 | 20 | 0 | 14% | 2.4 | 33.5% | 7.8% | 25.7% | 0.0% | 1.74 | 1.44 | — |
| 2023 | 25 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 21 | 10 | 78 | 345 | 100 | 44 | 12 | 48% | 3.7 | 24.2% | 12.1% | 12.1% | 3.8% | 3.91 | 4.67 | — |
| 2023 | 25 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 21 | 10 | 78 | 345 | 100 | 44 | 12 | 48% | 3.7 | 29.0% | 12.8% | 16.2% | 3.5% | 3.91 | 4.22 | — |
| 2024 | 26 | AAA MLE | Scranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders | 29 | 29 | 143 | 648 | 118 | 70 | 30 | 100% | 4.9 | 15.7% | 9.7% | 5.9% | 4.9% | 5.98 | 5.68 | — |
| 2024 | 26 | AAA MLE | Scranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders | 29 | 29 | 143 | 648 | 118 | 70 | 30 | 100% | 4.9 | 15.7% | 9.7% | 5.9% | 4.9% | 5.98 | 5.68 | — |
| 2024 | 26 | AAA RAW | Scranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders | 29 | 29 | 143 | 648 | 118 | 70 | 30 | 100% | 4.9 | 18.2% | 10.8% | 7.4% | 4.6% | 5.98 | 5.65 | — |
| 2025 | 27 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 5 | 4 | 17 | 72 | 16 | 9 | 1 | 80% | 3.5 | 21.2% | 14.4% | 6.8% | 1.9% | 3.12 | 4.18 | — |
| 2025 | 27 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 5 | 4 | 17 | 72 | 16 | 9 | 1 | 80% | 3.5 | 21.2% | 14.4% | 6.8% | 1.9% | 3.12 | 4.18 | — |
| 2025 | 27 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 5 | 4 | 17 | 72 | 16 | 9 | 1 | 80% | 3.5 | 22.2% | 12.5% | 9.7% | 1.4% | 3.12 | 3.56 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 29 | MLB | NYY | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.0% | 10.4% | 7.7% | 3.3% | 5.08 | 5.08 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 30 | MLB MLE | NYY | 19 | 0 | 20 | 86 | 16 | 9 | 3 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.2% | 10.5% | 7.7% | 3.5% | 5.11 | 5.18 | -0.1 |
| 2028 | 30 | MLB CTX | NYY | 6 | 0 | 6 | 25 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.2% | 10.5% | 7.7% | 3.5% | 5.11 | 5.18 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 6 | 0 | 6 | 27 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.2% | 10.5% | 7.7% | 3.5% | 5.11 | 4.80 | -0.0 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 190 | 0 | 200 | 844 | 157 | 94 | 31 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.2% | 10.5% | 7.7% | 3.5% | 5.11 | 4.80 | -0.6 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 124 | 53 | 409 | 1749 | 370 | 175 | 55 | 43% | 3.3 | 21.2% | 10.0% | 11.2% | 3.1% | 4.05 | 4.30 | -0.1 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 61 | 26 | 200 | 855 | 181 | 86 | 27 | 43% | 3.3 | 21.2% | 10.0% | 11.2% | 3.1% | 4.05 | 4.30 | -1.4 | |
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 AASomerset Patriots · 14 IPFIP 3.45 → 4.18 (+0.74)K% 26.2% → 21.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 26.23% | — | ×0.810 | 21.25% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 13.11% | — | ×1.100 | 14.43% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.64% | ÷1.030 | ×1.200 | 1.91% |
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 106).
Result: FIP 3.45 → 4.18, 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 AAAScranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders · 143 IPFIP 5.47 → 5.68 (+0.21)K% 18.2% → 15.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 18.21% | — | ×0.860 | 15.66% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 10.80% | — | ×0.900 | 9.72% |
| HR / BF /BF | 4.63% | ÷1.045 | ×1.100 | 4.87% |
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 109).
Result: FIP 5.47 → 5.68, 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 AAAScranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders · 44 IPFIP 6.00 → 6.31 (+0.31)K% 23.3% → 20.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 23.33% | — | ×0.860 | 20.07% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 15.71% | — | ×0.900 | 14.14% |
| HR / BF /BF | 5.24% | ÷1.017 | ×1.100 | 5.67% |
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 103).
Result: FIP 6.00 → 6.31, 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 AASomerset Patriots · 34 IPFIP 1.35 → 2.12 (+0.78)K% 37.8% → 30.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 37.78% | — | ×0.810 | 30.60% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 8.15% | — | ×1.100 | 8.96% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.74% | ÷1.033 | ×1.200 | 0.86% |
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 107).
Result: FIP 1.35 → 2.12, 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+Hudson Valley Renegades · 67 IPFIP 1.26 → 2.06 (+0.80)K% 33.5% → 25.8%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 33.46% | — | ×0.770 | 25.77% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 7.78% | — | ×1.150 | 8.95% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷1.014 | ×1.250 | 0.00% |
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 103).
Result: FIP 1.26 → 2.06, 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 ATampa Tarpons · 49 IPFIP 1.29 → 2.42 (+1.13)K% 38.2% → 28.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 38.22% | — | ×0.740 | 28.28% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 8.90% | — | ×1.180 | 10.50% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.52% | ÷1.000 | ×1.300 | 0.68% |
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 100).
Result: FIP 1.29 → 2.42, 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+Hudson Valley Renegades · 29 IPFIP 3.91 → 5.30 (+1.39)K% 31.2% → 24.0%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 31.20% | — | ×0.770 | 24.02% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 6.40% | — | ×1.150 | 7.36% |
| HR / BF /BF | 4.80% | ÷1.000 | ×1.250 | 6.00% |
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 100).
Result: FIP 3.91 → 5.30, 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).
2019 ROKGCL Yankees East · 21 IPFIP 1.57 → 2.46 (+0.89)K% 26.4% → 17.9%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 26.37% | — | ×0.680 | 17.93% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 5.49% | — | ×1.250 | 6.87% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷1.000 | ×1.400 | 0.00% |
Factors used: pitcher ROK level factors — K ×0.68, BB ×1.25, HR ×1.40. 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 1.57 → 2.46, 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).