Hunter Parks

P Louisville Bats

Age 26 RHP 6'2" / 193 lbs AAA

Overview

AAAPROSPECT

ETA2028MLB%10%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	23	AACIN	8	8	28	6.83	4.65	19.4%	20.1%	—	K 15.7% · BB 22.2% · FIP 5.01
2025	24	MIX2 levels	30	6	56	5.30	5.03	20.7%	14.3%	—	K 17.1% · BB 14.1% · FIP 5.44
2026	25	MIX2 levels	51	0	55	5.20	4.04	31.9%	16.1%	—	K 27.0% · BB 15.2% · FIP 4.42
2027PROJ	26	MLBCIN	4	0	4	5.15	5.15	22.8%	14.6%	-0.0
2028PROJ43% MLB	27	MLBCIN	15	0	16	5.09	5.11	22.8%	14.1%	-0.1
2029PROJ63% MLB	28	MLBCIN	20	0	21	5.09	5.13	22.7%	13.9%	-0.1

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

Contract

No contract data on file.

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 -0.3 / P90 1.5, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 94%

CompsGrant Black (age 27) · Noah Denoyer (age 25) · Sean Isaac (age 25)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 131123vR 115

ERA5.15

FIP5.15

K%22.8%

BB%14.6%

K-BB%8.1%

Proj IP37

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 37 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	20	ROK MLE	ACL Reds	6	3	11	45	13	4	0	50%	1.9	28.9%	8.9%	20.0%	0.0%	1.59	1.79	—
2021	20	ROK RAW	ACL Reds	6	3	11	45	13	4	0	50%	1.9	28.9%	8.9%	20.0%	0.0%	1.59	1.86	—
2022	21	A MLE	Daytona Tortugas	25	14	82	372	94	53	7	56%	3.3	18.7%	16.8%	1.9%	2.8%	4.70	5.17	—
2022	21	A RAW	Daytona Tortugas	25	14	82	372	94	53	7	56%	3.3	25.3%	14.2%	11.0%	1.9%	4.70	3.85	—
2023	22	A+ MLE	Dayton Dragons	22	22	80	358	88	60	6	100%	3.6	18.9%	19.3%	-0.3%	2.2%	4.18	5.15	—
2023	22	A+ RAW	Dayton Dragons	22	22	80	358	88	60	6	100%	3.6	24.6%	16.8%	7.8%	1.7%	4.18	4.13	—
2024	23	AA MLE	Chattanooga Lookouts	8	8	28	139	27	28	1	100%	3.5	15.7%	22.2%	-6.4%	0.8%	6.83	5.01	—
2024	23	AA MLE	Chattanooga Lookouts	8	8	28	139	27	28	1	100%	3.5	15.7%	22.2%	-6.4%	0.8%	6.83	5.01	—
2024	23	AA RAW	Chattanooga Lookouts	8	8	28	139	27	28	1	100%	3.5	19.4%	20.1%	-0.7%	0.7%	6.83	4.65	—
2025	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	30	6	56	266	55	38	8	20%	1.9	17.1%	14.1%	3.0%	3.6%	5.30	5.44	—
2025	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	30	6	56	266	55	38	8	20%	1.9	17.1%	14.1%	3.0%	3.6%	5.30	5.44	—
2025	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	30	6	56	266	55	38	8	20%	1.9	20.7%	14.3%	6.4%	3.0%	5.30	5.03	—
2026	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	51	0	55	254	81	41	7	0%	1.1	27.0%	15.2%	11.7%	3.0%	5.20	4.42	—
2026	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	51	0	55	254	81	41	7	0%	1.1	27.0%	15.2%	11.7%	3.0%	5.20	4.42	—
2026	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	51	0	55	254	81	41	7	0%	1.1	31.9%	16.1%	15.7%	2.8%	5.20	4.04	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	26	MLB	CIN	4	0	4	17	4	2	1	0%	1.0	22.8%	14.6%	8.1%	3.2%	5.15	5.15	-0.0
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	27	MLB MLE	CIN	37	0	38	163	37	23	5	0%	1.0	22.8%	14.1%	8.7%	3.2%	5.09	5.11	-0.2
2029	28	MLB MLE	CIN	32	0	33	140	32	20	5	0%	1.0	22.7%	13.9%	8.8%	3.3%	5.09	5.13	-0.2
2028	27	MLB CTX	CIN	15	0	16	68	15	10	2	0%	1.1	22.8%	14.1%	8.7%	3.2%	5.09	5.11	-0.1
2029	28	MLB CTX	CIN	20	0	21	89	20	12	3	0%	1.1	22.7%	13.9%	8.8%	3.3%	5.09	5.13	-0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		35	0	37	157	36	22	5	0%	1.1	22.8%	14.0%	8.7%	3.3%	5.09	4.74	-0.1
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	194	118	27	0%	1.1	22.8%	14.0%	8.7%	3.3%	5.09	4.74	-0.5
Career	—	MLE		142	53	312	1434	286	242	37	37%	2.2	19.9%	16.9%	3.0%	2.6%	4.84	4.96	-0.5
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		91	34	200	918	183	155	23	37%	2.2	19.9%	16.9%	3.0%	2.6%	4.84	4.96	-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 AAALouisville Bats · 40 IPFIP 4.69 → 5.03 (+0.34)K% 29.4% → 25.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.38%	—	×0.860	25.27%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	16.49%	—	×0.900	14.85%
HR / BF /BF	3.61%	÷1.000	×1.100	3.97%

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 4.69 → 5.03, 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 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 15 IPFIP 1.62 → 2.45 (+0.83)K% 40.0% → 32.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	40.00%	—	×0.810	32.40%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	15.00%	—	×1.100	16.50%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.000	×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 100).

Result: FIP 1.62 → 2.45, 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).

2025 AAALouisville Bats · 25 IPFIP 6.52 → 6.99 (+0.48)K% 12.5% → 10.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	12.50%	—	×0.860	10.75%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	16.18%	—	×0.900	14.56%
HR / BF /BF	4.41%	÷0.901	×1.100	5.38%

Result: FIP 6.52 → 6.99, 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 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 31 IPFIP 3.04 → 3.81 (+0.77)K% 29.2% → 23.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.23%	—	×0.810	23.68%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.31%	—	×1.100	13.54%
HR / BF /BF	1.54%	÷1.021	×1.200	1.81%

Result: FIP 3.04 → 3.81, 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 · 28 IPFIP 4.41 → 5.01 (+0.61)K% 19.4% → 15.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.42%	—	×0.810	15.73%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	20.14%	—	×1.100	22.16%
HR / BF /BF	0.72%	÷1.089	×1.200	0.79%

Result: FIP 4.41 → 5.01, 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 A+Dayton Dragons · 80 IPFIP 4.07 → 5.15 (+1.09)K% 24.6% → 18.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.58%	—	×0.770	18.93%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	16.76%	—	×1.150	19.27%
HR / BF /BF	1.68%	÷0.951	×1.250	2.20%

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 90).

Result: FIP 4.07 → 5.15, 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 · 82 IPFIP 3.80 → 5.17 (+1.37)K% 25.3% → 18.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.27%	—	×0.740	18.70%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.25%	—	×1.180	16.81%
HR / BF /BF	1.88%	÷0.883	×1.300	2.77%

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 77).

Result: FIP 3.80 → 5.17, 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).

2021 ROKACL Reds · 11 IPFIP 1.79 → 2.85 (+1.06)K% 28.9% → 19.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.89%	—	×0.680	19.64%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.89%	—	×1.250	11.11%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.026	×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 105).

Result: FIP 1.79 → 2.85, 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
Hunter Parks (OGILVIE)	—	—	5.15	22.8%	14.6%	3.2%	—	5.12	22.8%	8.7%	72	-0.03	—	—	—
Grant Black R 2021 · 4.46 FIP	27	SW	4.46	19.0%	13.9%	2.2%	.327	5.35	15.0%	3.8%	156	+0.89	4.46	215	83
Noah Denoyer R 2023 · 5.24 FIP	25	SW	5.24	22.2%	14.0%	4.1%	.306	—	—	—	—	—	3.26	181	79
Sean Isaac R 2018 · 4.20 FIP	25	SW	4.20	24.2%	16.3%	2.0%	.292	—	—	—	—	—	3.27	155	79
Taylor Grover R 2017 · 4.93 FIP	26	SW	4.93	20.0%	10.9%	3.9%	.320	4.89	16.2%	8.9%	14	-0.04	3.68	239	77
Sam Gardner R 2023 · 4.04 FIP	26	SU	4.04	23.8%	15.1%	1.9%	.298	3.23	26.7%	16.4%	76	-0.81	2.28	121	77
Emmanuel Chapman R 2024 · 4.08 FIP	25	SW	4.08	19.7%	10.6%	2.4%	.256	4.52	17.8%	1.3%	117	+0.44	3.81	198	76
Ryan Conroy R 2022 · 4.75 FIP	25	SU	4.75	19.3%	12.6%	3.1%	.361	—	—	—	—	—	4.01	106	76
Hayden Snelsire R 2024 · 5.10 FIP	23	SU	5.10	18.9%	13.8%	3.4%	.272	4.28	20.0%	13.7%	135	-0.82	3.83	178	76
Fernando Baez R 2017 · 5.37 FIP	25	SU	5.37	24.3%	21.2%	3.0%	.271	—	—	—	—	—	3.45	129	75
Eric Cerantola R 2024 · 4.65 FIP	24	SW	4.65	25.7%	16.6%	2.9%	.245	3.74	26.2%	15.9%	100	-0.91	3.37	270	75
Gabriel Ponce R 2023 · 4.59 FIP	24	SU	4.59	24.1%	14.9%	3.0%	.291	—	—	—	—	—	4.45	161	75
Nick Ernst R 2022 · 5.05 FIP	25	SU	5.05	21.9%	14.6%	3.5%	.275	—	—	—	—	—	3.56	117	75
Jarret Whorff R 2024 · 4.04 FIP	25	SU	4.04	18.9%	10.2%	2.3%	.271	4.52	19.6%	12.0%	123	+0.48	3.88	257	75
Dennis Sarfate R 2008 · 4.42 FIP	27	SU	4.42	24.0%	16.7%	2.2%	.263	4.81	19.8%	5.9%	23	+0.39	4.42	103	75
Logan Taylor R 2018 · 4.79 FIP	26	SU	4.79	17.2%	12.1%	2.9%	.316	—	—	—	—	—	3.55	300	75
Carter Loewen R 2024 · 4.26 FIP	25	SU	4.26	23.1%	15.0%	2.2%	.312	4.16	20.0%	11.9%	23	-0.10	2.67	145	75
Cameron Foster R 2024 · 4.83 FIP	25	SW	4.83	17.4%	11.5%	3.2%	.321	3.09	25.5%	17.5%	60	-1.74	2.50	213	74
Spencer Bivens R 2022 · 4.86 FIP	28	SU	4.86	19.8%	13.5%	3.1%	.265	3.85	18.1%	10.3%	272	-1.01	3.52	391	74
Cody Tucker R 2024 · 4.97 FIP	25	SU	4.97	22.0%	12.0%	4.0%	.272	5.36	15.8%	-1.9%	40	+0.39	4.97	105	74
Tyler Davis R 2024 · 6.02 FIP	25	SU	6.02	21.0%	18.8%	4.2%	.317	3.78	21.9%	10.2%	111	-2.24	3.20	137	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	0.5	36	22.8%	14.2%	1.25	5.11
John Hudek ('99)	1.0	40	23.0%	13.7%	1.30	4.43
Armando Almanza ('05)	1.1	54	24.4%	14.3%	1.43	4.82
Doug Creek ('05)	1.4	58	22.2%	15.1%	1.52	5.32
Ed Glynn ('75-'85, -0 WAR*)	1.3	53	23.5%*	12.9%*	1.22*	4.69*
Gene Harris ('89-'95, -1 WAR*)	1.2	40	20.0%*	12.5%*	0.98*	4.96*
Fred Lasher ('63-'71, -1 WAR*)	1.0	50	21.5%*	11.9%*	1.05*	4.68*