Theo Denlinger

P Portland Sea Dogs

Age 31 RHP 6'3" / 240 lbs AA

Overview

AAPROSPECT

MLB%2%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2022	26	MIX2 levels	40	0	48	4.47	3.49	31.6%	9.6%	—	K 23.9% · BB 11.3% · FIP 4.76
2023	27	MIX2 levels	35	0	46	5.44	3.81	24.3%	15.2%	—	K 20.1% · BB 15.1% · FIP 4.19
2024	28	AABOS	23	0	41	5.53	3.64	18.9%	4.9%	—	K 15.3% · BB 5.4% · FIP 4.23
2025	29	No MLB games played
2026	30	No MLB games played
2027PROJ	31	MLBBOS	—	—	0	4.37	4.37	20.5%	7.7%	—
2028PROJ31% MLB	32	MLBBOS	6	0	6	4.50	4.59	20.4%	8.2%	-0.0

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

Contract

No contract data on file.

CompsJoe Nelson (age 31) · Scott Atchison (age 31) · Mark Serrano (age 31)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 116108vR 100

ERA4.37

FIP4.37

K%20.5%

BB%7.7%

K-BB%12.8%

Proj IP22

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 22 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	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	16	0	17	68	31	6	1	0%	1.0	33.2%	10.2%	23.0%	2.4%	3.24	2.92	—
2021	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	16	0	17	68	31	6	1	0%	1.0	45.6%	8.8%	36.8%	1.5%	3.24	1.24	—
2022	26	MIX MLE	2 levels	40	0	48	209	66	20	7	0%	1.2	23.9%	11.3%	12.6%	4.1%	4.47	4.76	—
2022	26	MIX RAW	2 levels	40	0	48	209	66	20	7	0%	1.2	31.6%	9.6%	22.0%	3.3%	4.47	3.49	—
2023	27	MIX MLE	2 levels	35	0	46	210	51	32	3	0%	1.3	20.1%	15.1%	4.9%	1.6%	5.44	4.19	—
2023	27	MIX RAW	2 levels	35	0	46	210	51	32	3	0%	1.3	24.3%	15.2%	9.0%	1.4%	5.44	3.81	—
2024	28	AA MLE	Portland Sea Dogs	23	0	41	185	35	9	5	0%	1.8	15.3%	5.4%	10.0%	3.2%	5.53	4.23	—
2024	28	AA MLE	Portland Sea Dogs	23	0	41	185	35	9	5	0%	1.8	15.3%	5.4%	10.0%	3.2%	5.53	4.23	—
2024	28	AA RAW	Portland Sea Dogs	23	0	41	185	35	9	5	0%	1.8	18.9%	4.9%	14.1%	2.7%	5.53	3.64	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	31	MLB	BOS	—	—	0	—	—	—	—	—	—	20.5%	7.7%	12.8%	3.0%	4.37	4.37	—
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	32	MLB MLE	BOS	18	0	19	79	16	7	3	0%	1.0	20.4%	8.2%	12.1%	3.3%	4.50	4.59	-0.0
2028	32	MLB CTX	BOS	6	0	6	25	5	2	1	0%	1.0	20.4%	8.2%	12.1%	3.3%	4.50	4.59	-0.0
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		6	0	6	25	5	2	1	0%	1.0	20.4%	8.2%	12.1%	3.3%	4.50	4.21	+0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	171	68	34	0%	1.1	20.4%	8.2%	12.1%	3.3%	4.50	4.21	+0.8
Career	—	MLE		114	0	152	672	143	72	19	0%	1.3	21.3%	10.7%	10.5%	2.9%	4.91	4.25	-0.0
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		150	0	200	884	188	95	26	0%	1.3	21.3%	10.7%	10.5%	2.9%	4.91	4.25	-0.1

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 AAPortland Sea Dogs · 41 IPFIP 3.60 → 4.23 (+0.63)K% 18.9% → 15.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	18.92%	—	×0.810	15.32%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.86%	—	×1.100	5.35%
HR / BF /BF	2.70%	÷1.018	×1.200	3.19%

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 104).

Result: FIP 3.60 → 4.23, 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).

2023 AAPortland Sea Dogs · 31 IPFIP 2.78 → 3.39 (+0.61)K% 25.4% → 20.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.37%	—	×0.810	20.55%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.19%	—	×1.100	12.31%
HR / BF /BF	0.75%	÷1.048	×1.200	0.85%

Result: FIP 2.78 → 3.39, 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 AAAWorcester Red Sox · 16 IPFIP 5.49 → 5.60 (+0.11)K% 22.4% → 19.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.37%	—	×0.860	19.24%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	22.37%	—	×0.900	20.13%
HR / BF /BF	2.63%	÷1.008	×1.100	2.87%

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 102).

Result: FIP 5.49 → 5.60, 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 AABirmingham Barons · 38 IPFIP 3.89 → 4.76 (+0.87)K% 29.5% → 23.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.52%	—	×0.810	23.91%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.24%	—	×1.100	11.27%
HR / BF /BF	3.61%	÷1.056	×1.200	4.11%

Result: FIP 3.89 → 4.76, 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+Winston-Salem Dash · 10 IPFIP 1.92 → 3.22 (+1.29)K% 39.5% → 30.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	39.53%	—	×0.770	30.44%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	6.98%	—	×1.150	8.02%
HR / BF /BF	2.33%	÷0.955	×1.250	3.04%

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 91).

Result: FIP 1.92 → 3.22, 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 AKannapolis Cannon Ballers · 15 IPFIP 1.35 → 2.92 (+1.56)K% 44.8% → 33.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	44.83%	—	×0.740	33.17%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.62%	—	×1.180	10.17%
HR / BF /BF	1.72%	÷0.925	×1.300	2.42%

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 85).

Result: FIP 1.35 → 2.92, 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
Theo Denlinger (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.37	20.5%	7.7%	3.0%	—	4.59	20.4%	12.1%	19	+0.22	—	—	—
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	85
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	82
Mark Serrano R 2017 · 3.56 FIP	31	SU	3.56	21.9%	6.4%	2.7%	.240	5.25	20.2%	12.3%	42	+1.69	3.16	120	81
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	81
Mike Broadway R 2018 · 4.65 FIP	31	SU	4.65	23.0%	10.6%	3.9%	.282	—	—	—	—	—	1.74	195	80
Juan Sandoval R 2015 · 3.82 FIP	34	SU	3.82	15.4%	6.0%	2.3%	.294	3.33	17.4%	8.8%	116	-0.49	3.24	225	80
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	80
Adrian Ramirez R 2019 · 4.29 FIP	31	SU	4.29	21.7%	6.3%	4.0%	.327	—	—	—	—	—	3.04	137	79
Jose Manuel Lopez R 2016 · 3.50 FIP	31	SU	3.50	16.4%	8.4%	1.3%	.308	4.77	19.3%	7.3%	90	+1.27	3.50	170	78
Chris Hatcher R 2016 · 4.61 FIP	31	SU	4.61	23.8%	9.4%	4.2%	.283	4.69	22.0%	13.8%	96	+0.08	2.51	246	78
Mike Buddie R 2002 · 4.26 FIP	31	SU	4.26	15.1%	7.6%	2.7%	.297	—	—	—	—	—	3.76	123	78
Ryan Kelly R 2019 · 4.33 FIP	31	SU	4.33	14.7%	7.2%	2.8%	.307	—	—	—	—	—	2.49	131	77
Erik Davis R 2018 · 3.52 FIP	31	SU	3.52	17.4%	8.9%	1.4%	.317	—	—	—	—	—	3.05	227	77
Andrew Robinson R 2017 · 4.32 FIP	29	SU	4.32	23.4%	8.8%	3.8%	.245	—	—	—	—	—	3.19	160	76
Brian Schlitter R 2016 · 3.28 FIP	30	SU	3.28	20.6%	10.8%	1.0%	.333	3.81	14.4%	6.6%	110	+0.53	3.27	300	76
Neil Wagner R 2016 · 4.05 FIP	32	SU	4.05	19.8%	12.3%	1.9%	.360	3.11	20.7%	12.1%	54	-0.94	3.11	135	76
Miguel Mejia R 2019 · 4.41 FIP	31	SU	4.41	15.7%	10.7%	2.3%	.341	—	—	—	—	—	3.37	108	75
Greg Burke R 2013 · 3.70 FIP	30	SU	3.70	17.9%	8.3%	1.9%	.357	3.61	22.1%	14.8%	62	-0.09	3.61	139	75
Gerardo Sanchez R 2019 · 3.58 FIP	30	SU	3.58	20.5%	5.4%	2.8%	.300	—	—	—	—	—	2.65	137	75
Jeff Fulchino R 2011 · 4.44 FIP	31	SU	4.44	20.4%	11.1%	3.0%	.302	—	—	—	—	—	3.36	178	75