Jackson Lancaster
P Montgomery Biscuits| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 25 | MIX2 levels | 27 | 1 | 34 | 5.82 | 3.34 | 31.0% | 8.4% | — | K 24.0% · BB 11.1% · FIP 4.48 |
| 2025 | 26 | MIX2 levels | 30 | 0 | 53 | 2.91 | 3.23 | 24.6% | 9.2% | — | K 19.5% · BB 10.3% · FIP 4.15 |
| 2026 | 27 | MIX2 levels | 31 | 0 | 40 | 9.15 | 6.22 | 21.2% | 15.7% | — | K 16.8% · BB 17.5% · FIP 6.95 |
| 2027PROJ | 28 | MLBTB | — | — | 0 | 5.56 | 5.56 | 18.4% | 14.0% | — | |
| 2028PROJ31% MLB | 29 | MLBTB | 6 | 0 | 6 | 5.51 | 5.57 | 18.6% | 13.8% | -0.1 |
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) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 24 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 22 | 1 | 27 | 121 | 42 | 16 | 2 | 5% | 1.2 | 18.9% | 17.6% | 1.3% | 2.6% | 4.00 | 5.14 | — |
| 2023 | 24 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 22 | 1 | 27 | 121 | 42 | 16 | 2 | 5% | 1.2 | 34.7% | 13.2% | 21.5% | 1.7% | 4.00 | 2.73 | — |
| 2024 | 25 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 27 | 1 | 34 | 155 | 48 | 13 | 5 | 4% | 1.3 | 24.0% | 11.1% | 12.9% | 3.6% | 5.82 | 4.48 | — |
| 2024 | 25 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 27 | 1 | 34 | 155 | 48 | 13 | 5 | 4% | 1.3 | 24.0% | 11.1% | 12.9% | 3.6% | 5.82 | 4.48 | — |
| 2024 | 25 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 27 | 1 | 34 | 155 | 48 | 13 | 5 | 4% | 1.3 | 31.0% | 8.4% | 22.6% | 3.2% | 5.82 | 3.34 | — |
| 2025 | 26 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 30 | 0 | 53 | 207 | 51 | 19 | 4 | 0% | 1.8 | 19.5% | 10.3% | 9.2% | 2.5% | 2.91 | 4.15 | — |
| 2025 | 26 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 30 | 0 | 53 | 207 | 51 | 19 | 4 | 0% | 1.8 | 19.5% | 10.3% | 9.2% | 2.5% | 2.91 | 4.15 | — |
| 2025 | 26 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 30 | 0 | 53 | 207 | 51 | 19 | 4 | 0% | 1.8 | 24.6% | 9.2% | 15.5% | 1.9% | 2.91 | 3.23 | — |
| 2026 | 27 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 31 | 0 | 40 | 198 | 42 | 31 | 9 | 0% | 1.3 | 16.8% | 17.5% | -0.7% | 5.6% | 9.15 | 6.95 | — |
| 2026 | 27 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 31 | 0 | 40 | 198 | 42 | 31 | 9 | 0% | 1.3 | 16.8% | 17.5% | -0.7% | 5.6% | 9.15 | 6.95 | — |
| 2026 | 27 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 31 | 0 | 40 | 198 | 42 | 31 | 9 | 0% | 1.3 | 21.2% | 15.7% | 5.6% | 4.5% | 9.15 | 6.22 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 28 | MLB | TB | — | — | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 18.4% | 14.0% | 4.4% | 3.4% | 5.56 | 5.56 | — |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 29 | MLB MLE | TB | 17 | 0 | 18 | 77 | 14 | 11 | 3 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.6% | 13.8% | 4.9% | 3.5% | 5.51 | 5.57 | -0.2 |
| 2028 | 29 | MLB CTX | TB | 6 | 0 | 6 | 25 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.6% | 13.8% | 4.9% | 3.5% | 5.51 | 5.57 | -0.1 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 5 | 0 | 6 | 24 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.6% | 13.8% | 4.9% | 3.5% | 5.51 | 5.19 | -0.0 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 190 | 0 | 200 | 844 | 175 | 105 | 35 | 0% | 1.1 | 18.6% | 13.8% | 4.9% | 3.5% | 5.51 | 5.19 | -1.5 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 110 | 2 | 154 | 681 | 133 | 94 | 25 | 2% | 1.4 | 19.6% | 13.9% | 5.7% | 3.7% | 5.38 | 5.22 | -0.2 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 143 | 3 | 200 | 884 | 173 | 123 | 32 | 2% | 1.4 | 19.6% | 13.9% | 5.7% | 3.7% | 5.38 | 5.22 | -2.4 | |
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.
2026 AAMontgomery Biscuits · 25 IPFIP 5.88 → 6.79 (+0.90)K% 16.7% → 13.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 16.67% | — | ×0.810 | 13.50% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 15.87% | — | ×1.100 | 17.46% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.97% | ÷1.000 | ×1.200 | 4.76% |
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 5.88 → 6.79, 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 A+Bowling Green Hot Rods · 15 IPFIP 5.62 → 7.24 (+1.62)K% 29.2% → 22.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 29.17% | — | ×0.770 | 22.46% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 15.28% | — | ×1.150 | 17.57% |
| HR / BF /BF | 5.56% | ÷1.000 | ×1.250 | 6.94% |
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 5.62 → 7.24, 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 AAMontgomery Biscuits · 29 IPFIP 3.91 → 4.81 (+0.90)K% 21.7% → 17.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 21.74% | — | ×0.810 | 17.61% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.57% | — | ×1.100 | 10.52% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.61% | ÷0.922 | ×1.200 | 3.39% |
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 84).
Result: FIP 3.91 → 4.81, 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).
2025 A+Bowling Green Hot Rods · 23 IPFIP 2.41 → 3.33 (+0.92)K% 28.3% → 21.8%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 28.26% | — | ×0.770 | 21.76% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 8.70% | — | ×1.150 | 10.00% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.09% | ÷0.930 | ×1.250 | 1.46% |
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 86).
Result: FIP 2.41 → 3.33, 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).
2024 A+Bowling Green Hot Rods · 29 IPFIP 3.32 → 4.48 (+1.16)K% 31.1% → 24.0%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 31.11% | — | ×0.770 | 23.96% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.63% | — | ×1.150 | 11.07% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.96% | ÷1.015 | ×1.250 | 3.65% |
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 3.32 → 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).
2024 ROKFCL Rays · 5 IPFIP 3.31 → 5.21 (+1.90)K% 30.0% → 20.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 30.00% | — | ×0.680 | 20.40% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 0.00% | — | ×1.250 | 0.00% |
| HR / BF /BF | 5.00% | ÷1.002 | ×1.400 | 6.98% |
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 3.31 → 5.21, 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 ACharleston RiverDogs · 20 IPFIP 4.00 → 5.14 (+1.14)K% 25.5% → 18.9%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 25.53% | — | ×0.740 | 18.89% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 14.89% | — | ×1.180 | 17.57% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.13% | ÷1.075 | ×1.300 | 2.57% |
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 115).
Result: FIP 4.00 → 5.14, 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 ROKFCL Rays · 7 IPFIP -1.59 → 0.44 (+2.04)K% 66.7% → 45.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 66.67% | — | ×0.680 | 45.33% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 7.41% | — | ×1.250 | 9.26% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷0.911 | ×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 82).
Result: FIP -1.59 → 0.44, 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).