Andrew Magno

P Norfolk Tides

Age 29 LHP 5'11" / 190 lbs AAA peak 0.1 · 2027

Overview

AAAPROSPECT

ETA2029MLB%10%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	26	MIX2 levels	45	0	66	5.56	3.69	25.7%	11.3%	—	K 21.7% · BB 10.4% · FIP 4.30
2025	27	AADET	42	1	66	2.31	2.60	27.7%	11.3%	—	K 22.5% · BB 12.4% · FIP 3.23
2026	28	AAABAL	47	2	53	1.70	3.46	24.0%	13.1%	—	K 20.7% · BB 11.8% · FIP 3.64
2027PROJ	29	MLBBAL	7	0	7	4.51	4.51	21.2%	12.1%	0.0
2028PROJ37% MLB	30	MLBBAL	18	0	19	4.60	4.67	21.1%	12.1%	-0.0
2029PROJ55% MLB	31	MLBBAL	22	0	23	4.74	4.85	20.9%	12.2%	-0.1

Next 3 projected WAR -0.1Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Scouting grades · 20-80

Stuff50Control40Command50

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 -0.1 / P90 0.4, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 97%

CompsRaul Valdes (age 32) · Ryan Verdugo (age 28) · Colton Johnson (age 26)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 103111vR 119

ERA4.51

FIP4.51

K%21.2%

BB%12.1%

K-BB%9.2%

Proj IP69

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 69 IP

Grades · Contract

Scouting Grades

STUF5050

CTRL4040

CMD5050

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)
2021	23	MIX MLE	2 levels	27	0	35	160	47	34	0	0%	1.3	20.6%	26.6%	-6.0%	0.0%	3.57	4.73	—
2021	23	MIX RAW	2 levels	27	0	35	160	47	34	0	0%	1.3	29.4%	21.2%	8.1%	0.0%	3.57	3.33	—
2022	24	MIX MLE	3 levels	52	0	54	231	66	32	2	0%	1.0	22.7%	17.0%	5.8%	0.7%	2.65	3.72	—
2022	24	MIX RAW	3 levels	52	0	54	231	66	32	2	0%	1.0	28.6%	13.9%	14.7%	0.9%	2.65	2.92	—
2023	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	44	0	63	269	82	36	2	0%	1.4	25.0%	14.1%	10.9%	0.9%	1.99	3.25	—
2023	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	44	0	63	269	82	36	2	0%	1.4	30.5%	13.4%	17.1%	0.7%	1.99	2.63	—
2024	26	MIX MLE	2 levels	45	0	66	300	77	34	7	0%	1.5	21.7%	10.4%	11.3%	3.1%	5.56	4.30	—
2024	26	MIX MLE	2 levels	45	0	66	300	77	34	7	0%	1.5	21.7%	10.4%	11.3%	3.1%	5.56	4.30	—
2024	26	MIX RAW	2 levels	45	0	66	300	77	34	7	0%	1.5	25.7%	11.3%	14.3%	2.3%	5.56	3.69	—
2025	27	AA MLE	Erie SeaWolves	42	1	66	274	76	31	2	2%	1.6	22.5%	12.4%	10.0%	0.8%	2.31	3.23	—
2025	27	AA MLE	Erie SeaWolves	42	1	66	274	76	31	2	2%	1.6	22.5%	12.4%	10.0%	0.8%	2.31	3.23	—
2025	27	AA RAW	Erie SeaWolves	42	1	66	274	76	31	2	2%	1.6	27.7%	11.3%	16.4%	0.7%	2.31	2.60	—
2026	28	AAA MLE	Norfolk Tides	47	2	53	229	55	30	3	4%	1.1	20.7%	11.8%	8.9%	1.4%	1.70	3.64	—
2026	28	AAA MLE	Norfolk Tides	47	2	53	229	55	30	3	4%	1.1	20.7%	11.8%	8.9%	1.4%	1.70	3.64	—
2026	28	AAA RAW	Norfolk Tides	47	2	53	229	55	30	3	4%	1.1	24.0%	13.1%	10.9%	1.3%	1.70	3.46	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	29	MLB	BAL	7	0	7	30	6	4	1	0%	1.0	21.2%	12.1%	9.2%	2.4%	4.51	4.51	+0.0
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	30	MLB MLE	BAL	49	0	51	217	46	26	6	0%	1.0	21.1%	12.1%	9.0%	2.6%	4.60	4.67	-0.1
2029	31	MLB MLE	BAL	40	0	42	178	37	22	5	0%	1.1	20.9%	12.2%	8.7%	2.9%	4.74	4.85	-0.1
2028	30	MLB CTX	BAL	18	0	19	80	17	10	2	0%	1.1	21.1%	12.1%	9.0%	2.6%	4.60	4.67	-0.0
2029	31	MLB CTX	BAL	22	0	23	97	20	12	3	0%	1.0	20.9%	12.2%	8.7%	2.9%	4.74	4.85	-0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		40	0	42	178	37	22	5	0%	1.1	21.0%	12.2%	8.8%	2.8%	4.68	4.39	+0.1
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	176	104	24	0%	1.1	21.0%	12.2%	8.8%	2.8%	4.68	4.39	+0.4
Career	—	MLE		257	3	339	1463	327	212	19	1%	1.3	22.3%	14.5%	7.8%	1.3%	2.98	3.76	-0.2
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		152	2	200	864	193	125	11	1%	1.3	22.3%	14.5%	7.8%	1.3%	2.98	3.76	-0.5

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 AAANorfolk Tides · 53 IPFIP 3.45 → 3.64 (+0.19)K% 24.0% → 20.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.02%	—	×0.860	20.66%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.10%	—	×0.900	11.79%
HR / BF /BF	1.31%	÷1.000	×1.100	1.44%

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 3.45 → 3.64, 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 AAErie SeaWolves · 66 IPFIP 2.59 → 3.23 (+0.64)K% 27.7% → 22.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	27.74%	—	×0.810	22.47%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.31%	—	×1.100	12.45%
HR / BF /BF	0.73%	÷1.056	×1.200	0.83%

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 111).

Result: FIP 2.59 → 3.23, 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 AAAToledo Mud Hens · 50 IPFIP 3.71 → 4.17 (+0.46)K% 22.8% → 19.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.82%	—	×0.860	19.63%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.86%	—	×0.900	11.58%
HR / BF /BF	1.66%	÷0.792	×1.100	2.31%

Result: FIP 3.71 → 4.17, 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 AAErie SeaWolves · 16 IPFIP 3.39 → 4.82 (+1.43)K% 37.3% → 30.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	37.29%	—	×0.810	30.20%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	5.08%	—	×1.100	5.59%
HR / BF /BF	5.08%	÷0.941	×1.200	6.48%

Result: FIP 3.39 → 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 AAErie SeaWolves · 51 IPFIP 2.31 → 3.01 (+0.70)K% 31.5% → 25.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	31.46%	—	×0.810	25.48%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.68%	—	×1.100	13.94%
HR / BF /BF	0.47%	÷1.055	×1.200	0.53%

Result: FIP 2.31 → 3.01, 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 AAAToledo Mud Hens · 12 IPFIP 3.85 → 4.18 (+0.33)K% 26.8% → 23.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	26.79%	—	×0.860	23.04%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	16.07%	—	×0.900	14.46%
HR / BF /BF	1.79%	÷0.901	×1.100	2.18%

Result: FIP 3.85 → 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).

2022 A+West Michigan Whitecaps · 49 IPFIP 2.74 → 3.72 (+0.98)K% 29.5% → 22.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.52%	—	×0.770	22.73%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.76%	—	×1.150	16.98%
HR / BF /BF	0.48%	÷0.847	×1.250	0.70%

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 69).

Result: FIP 2.74 → 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).

2022 AAErie SeaWolves · 5 IPFIP 4.79 → 5.98 (+1.20)K% 20.0% → 16.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.00%	—	×0.810	16.20%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	5.00%	—	×1.100	5.50%
HR / BF /BF	5.00%	÷0.926	×1.200	6.48%

Result: FIP 4.79 → 5.98, 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).

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
Andrew Magno (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.51	21.2%	12.1%	2.4%	—	4.75	21.0%	8.8%	94	+0.24	—	—	—
Raul Valdes L 2010 · 4.02 FIP	32	SU	4.02	21.4%	9.9%	2.7%	.301	3.14	27.4%	22.5%	78	-0.88	2.29	160	88
Ryan Verdugo L 2015 · 3.61 FIP	28	SU	3.61	19.8%	10.8%	1.5%	.281	3.36	22.7%	17.3%	82	-0.25	3.36	153	88
Colton Johnson L 2024 · 3.92 FIP	26	SU	3.92	20.8%	11.0%	2.1%	.309	4.53	12.2%	-0.4%	48	+0.61	3.92	106	85
Stephen Randolph L 2003 · 4.83 FIP	29	SU	4.83	18.5%	14.8%	2.6%	.247	5.69	15.8%	-3.0%	82	+0.86	4.83	155	84
Edward Paredes L 2016 · 3.47 FIP	29	SU	3.47	24.1%	13.0%	1.4%	.225	3.55	23.7%	14.0%	86	+0.08	2.36	130	83
Andrew Barbosa L 2017 · 4.67 FIP	29	SU	4.67	20.2%	9.6%	3.8%	.301	—	—	—	—	—	2.70	175	81
Keith Hessler L 2018 · 4.96 FIP	29	SU	4.96	19.8%	13.3%	3.4%	.348	—	—	—	—	—	3.31	228	80
Darin Downs L 2014 · 3.78 FIP	29	SU	3.78	18.2%	11.5%	1.4%	.255	4.06	12.9%	8.7%	16	+0.28	2.83	107	80
Aaron Brown L 2021 · 4.13 FIP	29	SU	4.13	17.4%	12.8%	1.6%	.275	5.38	21.3%	8.8%	66	+1.25	4.04	269	79
Arturo Barradas L 2017 · 3.42 FIP	29	SU	3.42	18.1%	7.0%	1.8%	.288	3.24	16.1%	9.5%	34	-0.18	3.24	163	77
Jose Meraz L 2017 · 4.34 FIP	29	SU	4.34	16.4%	10.3%	2.4%	.282	3.80	10.5%	-2.0%	30	-0.54	3.78	110	77
Josh Smoker L 2018 · 3.66 FIP	29	SU	3.66	22.1%	8.4%	2.5%	.318	6.58	14.2%	3.4%	14	+2.92	2.71	230	76
Matt Thornton L 2006 · 3.43 FIP	29	SU	3.43	21.6%	7.5%	2.2%	.263	2.61	27.2%	20.5%	196	-0.82	1.71	663	76
Jeff Ibarra L 2017 · 3.64 FIP	29	SU	3.64	18.1%	7.0%	2.1%	.342	2.85	20.6%	17.2%	29	-0.79	2.85	101	76
Dario Alvarez L 2018 · 3.47 FIP	29	SU	3.47	20.7%	12.4%	1.0%	.250	—	—	—	—	—	3.47	160	74
Vic Darensbourg L 2000 · 3.93 FIP	29	SU	3.93	21.5%	9.9%	2.5%	.298	4.26	15.3%	9.6%	97	+0.33	2.94	287	74
Nick Hagadone L 2015 · 3.65 FIP	29	SU	3.65	22.6%	8.9%	2.4%	.329	3.74	22.6%	13.3%	33	+0.09	2.97	141	74
Jack Taschner L 2007 · 3.69 FIP	29	SU	3.69	23.0%	12.2%	1.8%	.286	4.41	16.2%	5.2%	97	+0.72	3.14	189	74
Juan Pablo Perez L 2007 · 5.32 FIP	28	SU	5.32	17.5%	14.0%	3.5%	.324	—	—	—	—	—	1.75	104	74
Mike Zagurski L 2012 · 4.48 FIP	29	SU	4.48	20.9%	11.7%	3.0%	.305	—	—	—	—	—	2.94	120	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	0.8	54	21.1%	12.1%	1.00	4.60
Tyler Yates ('09)	1.2	62	19.7%	12.0%	0.94	5.12
Fred Lasher ('63-'71, -1 WAR*)	1.0	50	21.5%*	11.9%*	1.05*	4.68*
Blake Wood ('18)	1.4	72	21.7%	11.2%	0.90	4.47
Fernando Rodriguez Jr. ('16)	1.2	58	24.6%	11.1%	0.93	4.35
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*