Dylan Hall

P Lansing Lugnuts

Age 29 RHP 6'5" / 210 lbs A+

Overview

A+PROSPECT

MLB%0%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2022	24	MIX2 levels	34	0	46	3.13	2.58	25.1%	8.2%	—	K 19.0% · BB 9.6% · FIP 3.47
2023	25	MIX3 levels	36	0	52	3.10	3.12	25.6%	11.5%	—	K 21.0% · BB 13.2% · FIP 3.98
2024	26	A+OAK	35	0	58	6.36	5.74	19.6%	11.1%	—	K 15.1% · BB 12.7% · FIP 7.24
2025	27	No MLB games played
2026	28	No MLB games played
2027PROJ	29	MLBOAK	—	—	0	4.86	4.86	20.5%	10.9%	—
2028PROJ30% MLB	30	MLBOAK	9	0	9	4.91	4.98	20.4%	11.1%	-0.0

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

Contract

No contract data on file.

CompsJim Miller (age 30) · Wirfin Obispo (age 30) · Joe Nelson (age 31)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 125117vR 109

ERA4.86

FIP4.86

K%20.5%

BB%10.9%

K-BB%9.5%

Proj IP40

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 40 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	23	MIX MLE	4 levels	10	3	21	101	25	13	2	30%	2.1	24.8%	12.9%	11.9%	2.0%	5.91	3.73	—
2021	23	MIX RAW	4 levels	10	3	21	101	25	13	2	30%	2.1	24.8%	12.9%	11.9%	2.0%	5.91	3.80	—
2022	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	34	0	46	195	49	16	2	0%	1.4	19.0%	9.6%	9.4%	1.4%	3.13	3.47	—
2022	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	34	0	46	195	49	16	2	0%	1.4	25.1%	8.2%	16.9%	1.0%	3.13	2.58	—
2023	25	MIX MLE	3 levels	36	0	52	227	58	26	3	0%	1.5	21.0%	13.2%	7.8%	1.8%	3.10	3.98	—
2023	25	MIX RAW	3 levels	36	0	52	227	58	26	3	0%	1.5	25.6%	11.5%	14.1%	1.3%	3.10	3.12	—
2024	26	A+ MLE	Lansing Lugnuts	35	0	58	271	53	30	13	0%	1.7	15.1%	12.7%	2.3%	6.9%	6.36	7.24	—
2024	26	A+ MLE	Lansing Lugnuts	35	0	58	271	53	30	13	0%	1.7	15.1%	12.7%	2.3%	6.9%	6.36	7.24	—
2024	26	A+ RAW	Lansing Lugnuts	35	0	58	271	53	30	13	0%	1.7	19.6%	11.1%	8.5%	4.8%	6.36	5.74	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	29	MLB	OAK	—	—	0	—	—	—	—	—	—	20.5%	10.9%	9.5%	3.1%	4.86	4.86	—
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	30	MLB MLE	OAK	29	0	30	128	26	14	4	0%	1.0	20.4%	11.1%	9.4%	3.3%	4.91	4.98	-0.1
2028	30	MLB CTX	OAK	9	0	9	38	8	4	1	0%	1.0	20.4%	11.1%	9.4%	3.3%	4.91	4.98	-0.0
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		9	0	9	39	8	4	1	0%	1.0	20.4%	11.1%	9.4%	3.3%	4.91	4.60	-0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	174	87	22	0%	1.1	20.4%	11.1%	9.4%	3.3%	4.91	4.60	-0.1
Career	—	MLE		115	3	178	794	151	96	27	3%	1.5	19.0%	12.1%	6.8%	3.5%	4.51	4.93	-0.2
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		129	3	200	894	170	108	31	3%	1.5	19.0%	12.1%	6.8%	3.5%	4.51	4.93	-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 A+Lansing Lugnuts · 58 IPFIP 5.48 → 7.24 (+1.76)K% 19.6% → 15.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.56%	—	×0.770	15.06%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.07%	—	×1.150	12.73%
HR / BF /BF	4.80%	÷0.867	×1.250	6.92%

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 73).

Result: FIP 5.48 → 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).

2023 AABinghamton Rumble Ponies · 27 IPFIP 3.67 → 4.41 (+0.74)K% 19.8% → 16.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.82%	—	×0.810	16.05%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.91%	—	×1.100	10.90%
HR / BF /BF	1.80%	÷0.925	×1.200	2.34%

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 85).

Result: FIP 3.67 → 4.41, 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+Brooklyn Cyclones · 22 IPFIP 2.48 → 3.51 (+1.03)K% 34.3% → 26.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	34.31%	—	×0.770	26.42%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.73%	—	×1.150	15.78%
HR / BF /BF	0.98%	÷1.054	×1.250	1.16%

Result: FIP 2.48 → 3.51, 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 ASt. Lucie Mets · 24 IPFIP 2.59 → 3.28 (+0.70)K% 21.2% → 15.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	21.21%	—	×0.740	15.70%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.10%	—	×1.180	11.92%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.949	×1.300	0.00%

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 90).

Result: FIP 2.59 → 3.28, 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+Brooklyn Cyclones · 22 IPFIP 2.57 → 3.66 (+1.09)K% 29.2% → 22.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.17%	—	×0.770	22.46%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	6.25%	—	×1.150	7.19%
HR / BF /BF	2.08%	÷0.925	×1.250	2.81%

Result: FIP 2.57 → 3.66, 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 AABinghamton Rumble Ponies · 7 IPFIP 5.48 → 6.52 (+1.04)K% 20.5% → 16.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.51%	—	×0.810	16.62%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.26%	—	×1.100	11.28%
HR / BF /BF	5.13%	÷0.995	×1.200	6.19%

Result: FIP 5.48 → 6.52, 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 ASt. Lucie Mets · 6 IPFIP 2.79 → 3.69 (+0.91)K% 25.9% → 19.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.93%	—	×0.740	19.19%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.81%	—	×1.180	17.48%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.988	×1.300	0.00%

Result: FIP 2.79 → 3.69, 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+Brooklyn Cyclones · 5 IPFIP 1.37 → 1.99 (+0.62)K% 27.3% → 21.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	27.27%	—	×0.770	21.00%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.55%	—	×1.150	5.23%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.925	×1.250	0.00%

Result: FIP 1.37 → 1.99, 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).

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
Dylan Hall (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.86	20.5%	10.9%	3.1%	—	4.98	20.4%	9.4%	30	+0.12	—	—	—
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	90
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	89
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	86
Brandon Cunniff R 2017 · 4.79 FIP	28	SU	4.79	20.1%	11.6%	3.5%	.275	6.80	13.9%	-1.9%	30	+2.01	3.89	180	84
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	84
Diego Moreno R 2016 · 3.75 FIP	29	SU	3.75	21.0%	8.2%	2.5%	.347	3.13	17.8%	11.9%	54	-0.62	2.29	187	83
Coleman Huntley III R 2022 · 4.05 FIP	29	SU	4.05	24.4%	10.9%	3.0%	.311	2.38	20.9%	12.6%	25	-1.67	2.38	160	83
Gregory Infante R 2016 · 4.47 FIP	29	SU	4.47	19.0%	12.3%	2.6%	.333	3.43	22.5%	15.8%	120	-1.04	2.97	230	83
Tyler Sturdevant R 2015 · 4.37 FIP	29	SU	4.37	21.3%	8.5%	3.6%	.241	3.97	18.5%	11.9%	118	-0.40	3.44	149	83
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	82
Tyler Walker R 2005 · 4.19 FIP	29	SU	4.19	19.4%	7.5%	3.2%	.303	3.61	19.7%	11.3%	93	-0.58	2.38	289	81
Cole McDonald R 2024 · 5.01 FIP	27	SU	5.01	20.9%	12.7%	3.8%	.281	—	—	—	—	—	2.81	153	80
Joe Colón J R 2017 · 4.25 FIP	27	SU	4.25	20.4%	12.1%	2.4%	.315	—	—	—	—	—	3.27	113	80
Thad Weber R 2013 · 5.18 FIP	28	SU	5.18	16.4%	13.1%	3.3%	.244	4.52	12.2%	6.0%	308	-0.66	4.40	378	80
Bo Schultz R 2015 · 4.30 FIP	29	SU	4.30	18.3%	7.9%	3.2%	.218	3.49	15.1%	8.9%	77	-0.81	2.73	141	79
Francisco Mendoza R 2016 · 3.81 FIP	28	SU	3.81	17.9%	7.7%	2.3%	.344	—	—	—	—	—	3.13	120	79
Brian Sanches R 2008 · 4.74 FIP	29	SU	4.74	18.5%	9.3%	3.7%	.378	4.01	20.5%	10.8%	182	-0.73	3.39	229	79
Marc Magliaro R 2018 · 3.94 FIP	28	SU	3.94	19.6%	7.3%	2.9%	.307	—	—	—	—	—	3.94	125	78
Carlos Fisher R 2011 · 4.33 FIP	28	SU	4.33	15.5%	9.1%	2.5%	.275	—	—	—	—	—	2.48	245	78

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	0.4	35	20.4%	11.0%	1.25	4.88
Valerio De Los Santos ('08)	1.3	51	18.7%	11.5%	1.30	4.57
Sam Long ('25)	1.1	42	19.5%	9.7%	1.28	4.65
Pedro Borbón ('03)	1.4	45	18.5%	11.1%	1.10	4.68
Bill Wilson ('69-'73, -0 WAR*)	1.3	52	20.3%*	11.5%*	1.13*	4.84*
Fred Lasher ('63-'71, -1 WAR*)	1.0	50	21.5%*	11.9%*	1.05*	4.68*
Kevin Hickey ('81-'91, 0 WAR*)	1.2	47	17.7%*	10.2%*	1.10*	4.27*