Stevie Branche

P Louisville Bats

Age 30 RHP 6'4" / 205 lbs AAA

Overview

AAAPROSPECT

MLB%10%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2022	25	AACIN	28	0	35	5.97	5.55	26.1%	18.8%	—	K 21.2% · BB 20.6% · FIP 6.19
2023	26	MIX2 levels	33	0	43	4.57	3.17	31.1%	16.8%	—	K 25.6% · BB 19.1% · FIP 4.04
2024	27	MIX2 levels	26	0	30	4.75	5.77	22.8%	18.8%	—	K 19.3% · BB 17.6% · FIP 5.67
2025	28	No MLB games played
2026	29	No MLB games played
2027PROJ	30	MLBCIN	2	0	2	4.81	4.81	21.8%	11.9%	-0.0
2028PROJ37% MLB	31	MLBCIN	6	0	6	4.88	4.96	21.6%	12.0%	-0.0

Next 2 projected WAR -0.0Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

CompsWirfin Obispo (age 30) · Jim Miller (age 30) · Joe Nelson (age 31)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 125116vR 108

ERA4.81

FIP4.81

K%21.8%

BB%11.9%

K-BB%9.9%

Proj IP16

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 16 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)
2021	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	31	1	58	250	100	35	2	3%	1.9	30.0%	16.4%	13.6%	1.1%	2.78	3.23	—
2021	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	31	1	58	250	100	35	2	3%	1.9	40.0%	14.0%	26.0%	0.8%	2.78	1.92	—
2022	25	AA MLE	Chattanooga Lookouts	28	0	35	176	46	33	6	0%	1.2	21.2%	20.6%	0.5%	4.1%	5.97	6.19	—
2022	25	AA RAW	Chattanooga Lookouts	28	0	35	176	46	33	6	0%	1.2	26.1%	18.8%	7.4%	3.4%	5.97	5.55	—
2023	26	MIX MLE	2 levels	33	0	43	196	61	33	2	0%	1.3	25.6%	19.1%	6.5%	1.2%	4.57	4.04	—
2023	26	MIX RAW	2 levels	33	0	43	196	61	33	2	0%	1.3	31.1%	16.8%	14.3%	1.0%	4.57	3.17	—
2024	27	MIX MLE	2 levels	26	0	30	149	34	28	5	0%	1.2	19.3%	17.6%	1.7%	3.6%	4.75	5.67	—
2024	27	MIX MLE	2 levels	26	0	30	149	34	28	5	0%	1.2	19.3%	17.6%	1.7%	3.6%	4.75	5.67	—
2024	27	MIX RAW	2 levels	26	0	30	149	34	28	5	0%	1.2	22.8%	18.8%	4.0%	3.4%	4.75	5.77	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	30	MLB	CIN	2	0	2	8	2	1	0	0%	1.0	21.8%	11.9%	9.9%	3.0%	4.81	4.81	-0.0
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	31	MLB MLE	CIN	16	0	17	71	15	9	2	0%	1.1	21.6%	12.0%	9.5%	3.2%	4.88	4.96	-0.1
2028	31	MLB CTX	CIN	6	0	6	25	5	3	1	0%	1.0	21.6%	12.0%	9.5%	3.2%	4.88	4.96	-0.0
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		6	0	6	26	6	3	1	0%	1.0	21.6%	12.0%	9.5%	3.2%	4.88	4.58	-0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	193	97	32	0%	1.1	21.6%	12.0%	9.5%	3.2%	4.88	4.58	-0.1
Career	—	MLE		118	1	167	771	191	141	18	1%	1.4	24.8%	18.3%	6.5%	2.3%	4.27	4.58	-0.1
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		142	1	200	925	229	169	21	1%	1.4	24.8%	18.3%	6.5%	2.3%	4.27	4.58	-1.0

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.

2024 AAALouisville Bats · 28 IPFIP 5.67 → 5.67 (−0.00)K% 22.5% → 19.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.46%	—	×0.860	19.32%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	19.57%	—	×0.900	17.61%
HR / BF /BF	3.62%	÷1.111	×1.100	3.59%

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 122).

Result: FIP 5.67 → 5.67, 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 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 41 IPFIP 3.21 → 4.04 (+0.83)K% 31.6% → 25.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	31.58%	—	×0.810	25.58%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	17.37%	—	×1.100	19.11%
HR / BF /BF	1.05%	÷1.017	×1.200	1.24%

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 103).

Result: FIP 3.21 → 4.04, 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 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 35 IPFIP 5.14 → 6.19 (+1.05)K% 26.1% → 21.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	26.14%	—	×0.810	21.17%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	18.75%	—	×1.100	20.62%
HR / BF /BF	3.41%	÷0.990	×1.200	4.13%

Result: FIP 5.14 → 6.19, 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 ADaytona Tortugas · 37 IPFIP 2.13 → 3.59 (+1.45)K% 41.0% → 30.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	40.96%	—	×0.740	30.31%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.46%	—	×1.180	17.06%
HR / BF /BF	1.20%	÷0.969	×1.300	1.62%

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 94).

Result: FIP 2.13 → 3.59, 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).

2021 A+Dayton Dragons · 21 IPFIP 1.54 → 2.53 (+0.99)K% 38.1% → 29.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	38.10%	—	×0.770	29.33%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.10%	—	×1.150	15.06%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.960	×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 92).

Result: FIP 1.54 → 2.53, 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
Stevie Branche (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.81	21.8%	11.9%	3.0%	—	4.96	21.6%	9.5%	17	+0.15	—	—	—
Wirfin Obispo R 2015 · 4.80 FIP	30	SU	4.80	18.6%	12.2%	3.1%	.292	1.31	28.6%	24.5%	126	-3.49	1.30	218	88
Jim Miller R 2012 · 4.56 FIP	30	SU	4.56	20.9%	11.8%	3.1%	.243	3.95	18.8%	14.7%	74	-0.61	3.95	140	87
Joe Nelson R 2006 · 3.91 FIP	31	SU	3.91	22.8%	10.4%	2.6%	.258	4.05	23.4%	12.8%	94	+0.14	3.08	139	86
Dustin Molleken R 2015 · 3.74 FIP	30	SU	3.74	20.4%	11.7%	1.6%	.287	3.90	20.6%	8.4%	77	+0.16	3.38	129	83
Neil Wagner R 2013 · 4.02 FIP	29	SU	4.02	20.5%	7.5%	3.1%	.306	4.05	19.8%	7.5%	43	+0.03	3.11	135	80
Esteban Haro R 2016 · 4.55 FIP	30	SU	4.55	17.1%	10.2%	2.9%	.338	3.83	11.6%	6.3%	75	-0.72	3.76	164	80
Erik Davis R 2017 · 4.25 FIP	30	SU	4.25	22.2%	11.1%	3.0%	.349	3.52	17.4%	8.5%	65	-0.73	3.05	227	79
Scott Atchison R 2007 · 4.55 FIP	31	SU	4.55	19.1%	7.6%	3.8%	.297	4.59	16.2%	9.5%	60	+0.04	2.52	340	76
Angel Castro R 2015 · 4.50 FIP	32	SU	4.50	15.9%	8.0%	3.1%	.268	4.28	13.6%	5.5%	231	-0.22	3.51	292	75
Mike Broadway R 2017 · 4.73 FIP	30	SU	4.73	18.3%	10.2%	3.4%	.245	4.65	23.0%	12.4%	49	-0.08	1.74	195	74
Dalier Hinojosa R 2016 · 4.30 FIP	30	SU	4.30	18.7%	12.6%	2.2%	.329	—	—	—	—	—	3.41	104	74
Hirokazu Sawamura R 2021 · 4.48 FIP	33	SU	4.48	26.2%	11.2%	4.0%	.263	4.02	18.1%	6.8%	51	-0.46	4.02	104	73
Andrew Robinson R 2017 · 4.32 FIP	29	SU	4.32	23.4%	8.8%	3.8%	.245	—	—	—	—	—	3.19	160	73
Carlos Fisher R 2011 · 4.33 FIP	28	SU	4.33	15.5%	9.1%	2.5%	.275	—	—	—	—	—	2.48	245	73
Jose Manuel Lopez R 2015 · 5.21 FIP	30	SU	5.21	18.6%	7.6%	4.9%	.373	3.56	18.5%	9.3%	93	-1.65	3.50	170	73
Javy Guerra R 2016 · 4.29 FIP	30	SU	4.29	21.3%	13.9%	2.3%	.303	3.95	19.5%	13.0%	193	-0.34	2.94	409	73
Leonel Campos R 2017 · 3.70 FIP	30	SU	3.70	25.7%	11.8%	2.3%	.241	—	—	—	—	—	2.62	168	72
Francisco Mendoza R 2016 · 3.81 FIP	28	SU	3.81	17.9%	7.7%	2.3%	.344	—	—	—	—	—	3.13	120	72
Wil Browning R 2017 · 4.44 FIP	28	SU	4.44	17.9%	13.1%	2.2%	.359	—	—	—	—	—	2.14	162	72
Ronald Peña R 2021 · 4.49 FIP	29	SU	4.49	16.5%	10.4%	2.7%	.288	—	—	—	—	—	3.72	187	72