Will Johnston

P Midland RockHounds

Age 26 LHP 6'3" / 225 lbs AA

Overview

AAPROSPECT

ETA2029MLB%2%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	23	MIX3 levels	27	15	100	3.88	2.60	33.2%	9.7%	—	K 24.8% · BB 11.6% · FIP 3.94
2025	24	MIX2 levels	43	6	70	4.89	3.54	28.9%	12.6%	—	K 23.5% · BB 13.2% · FIP 4.10
2026	25	MIX2 levels	37	1	38	4.30	4.53	24.6%	16.8%	—	K 21.5% · BB 19.7% · FIP 5.52
2027PROJ	26	MLBOAK	1	0	1	5.14	5.14	22.2%	15.0%	-0.0
2028PROJ27% MLB	27	MLBOAK	12	0	13	5.08	5.10	22.3%	14.5%	-0.1
2029PROJ46% MLB	28	MLBOAK	18	0	19	5.08	5.12	22.3%	14.2%	-0.1

Next 3 projected WAR -0.2Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 0.0 / P90 0.0, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 99%

CompsMatt Purke (age 26) · Graeme Stinson (age 25) · Trey Jeans (age 26)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 115123vR 131

ERA5.14

FIP5.14

K%22.2%

BB%15.0%

K-BB%7.2%

Proj IP60

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 60 IP

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)
2023	22	ROK MLE	ACL Athletics	4	1	7	30	6	5	1	25%	1.7	20.0%	16.7%	3.3%	3.3%	5.40	5.35	—
2023	22	ROK RAW	ACL Athletics	4	1	7	30	6	5	1	25%	1.7	20.0%	16.7%	3.3%	3.3%	5.40	5.50	—
2024	23	MIX MLE	3 levels	27	15	100	413	137	40	8	56%	3.7	24.8%	11.6%	13.2%	2.7%	3.88	3.94	—
2024	23	MIX MLE	3 levels	27	15	100	413	137	40	8	56%	3.7	24.8%	11.6%	13.2%	2.7%	3.88	3.94	—
2024	23	MIX RAW	3 levels	27	15	100	413	137	40	8	56%	3.7	33.2%	9.7%	23.5%	1.9%	3.88	2.60	—
2025	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	43	6	70	301	87	38	7	14%	1.6	23.5%	13.2%	10.3%	2.4%	4.89	4.10	—
2025	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	43	6	70	301	87	38	7	14%	1.6	23.5%	13.2%	10.3%	2.4%	4.89	4.10	—
2025	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	43	6	70	301	87	38	7	14%	1.6	28.9%	12.6%	16.3%	2.3%	4.89	3.54	—
2026	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	37	1	38	167	41	28	4	3%	1.0	21.5%	19.7%	1.8%	3.2%	4.30	5.52	—
2026	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	37	1	38	167	41	28	4	3%	1.0	21.5%	19.7%	1.8%	3.2%	4.30	5.52	—
2026	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	37	1	38	167	41	28	4	3%	1.0	24.6%	16.8%	7.8%	2.4%	4.30	4.53	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	26	MLB	OAK	1	0	1	4	1	1	0	0%	1.0	22.2%	15.0%	7.2%	3.0%	5.14	5.14	-0.0
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	27	MLB MLE	OAK	45	0	48	201	45	29	6	0%	1.1	22.3%	14.5%	7.8%	3.0%	5.08	5.10	-0.3
2029	28	MLB MLE	OAK	39	0	41	172	38	24	5	0%	1.0	22.3%	14.2%	8.0%	3.1%	5.08	5.12	-0.3
2028	27	MLB CTX	OAK	12	0	13	55	12	8	2	0%	1.1	22.3%	14.5%	7.8%	3.0%	5.08	5.10	-0.1
2029	28	MLB CTX	OAK	18	0	19	80	18	11	3	0%	1.1	22.3%	14.2%	8.0%	3.1%	5.08	5.12	-0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		30	0	32	133	30	19	4	0%	1.1	22.3%	14.3%	8.0%	3.1%	5.08	4.73	-0.1
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	190	120	25	0%	1.1	22.3%	14.3%	8.0%	3.1%	5.08	4.73	-0.4
Career	—	MLE		111	23	214	911	215	126	25	21%	1.9	23.6%	13.8%	9.8%	2.7%	4.33	4.33	-0.6
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		104	21	200	851	201	117	23	21%	1.9	23.6%	13.8%	9.8%	2.7%	4.33	4.33	-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 AAMidland RockHounds · 34 IPFIP 4.58 → 5.52 (+0.94)K% 26.5% → 21.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	26.49%	—	×0.810	21.46%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	17.88%	—	×1.100	19.67%
HR / BF /BF	2.65%	÷1.000	×1.200	3.18%

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 4.58 → 5.52, 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).

2025 AAMidland RockHounds · 60 IPFIP 2.43 → 3.20 (+0.77)K% 32.9% → 26.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	32.93%	—	×0.810	26.67%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.38%	—	×1.100	12.52%
HR / BF /BF	1.22%	÷1.043	×1.200	1.40%

Result: FIP 2.43 → 3.20, 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 AAALas Vegas Aviators · 10 IPFIP 8.47 → 8.09 (−0.38)K% 10.9% → 9.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	10.91%	—	×0.860	9.38%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	18.18%	—	×0.900	16.36%
HR / BF /BF	7.27%	÷1.183	×1.100	6.76%

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 137).

Result: FIP 8.47 → 8.09, 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+Lansing Lugnuts · 78 IPFIP 2.93 → 4.21 (+1.28)K% 29.9% → 23.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.94%	—	×0.770	23.05%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.26%	—	×1.150	10.65%
HR / BF /BF	2.16%	÷0.867	×1.250	3.12%

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 2.93 → 4.21, 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).

2024 AStockton Ports · 14 IPFIP 0.91 → 2.31 (+1.39)K% 48.1% → 35.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	48.15%	—	×0.740	35.63%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.81%	—	×1.180	17.48%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.164	×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 133).

Result: FIP 0.91 → 2.31, 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 AAMidland RockHounds · 8 IPFIP 2.01 → 3.16 (+1.15)K% 40.0% → 32.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	40.00%	—	×0.810	32.40%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	5.71%	—	×1.100	6.29%
HR / BF /BF	2.86%	÷0.940	×1.200	3.65%

Result: FIP 2.01 → 3.16, 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 ROKACL Athletics · 7 IPFIP 5.35 → 7.18 (+1.83)K% 20.0% → 13.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.00%	—	×0.680	13.60%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	16.67%	—	×1.250	20.83%
HR / BF /BF	3.33%	÷0.989	×1.400	4.72%

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 98).

Result: FIP 5.35 → 7.18, 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
Will Johnston (OGILVIE)	—	—	—	—	—	3.0%	—	5.11	22.3%	7.9%	88	-0.03	—	—	—
Matt Purke L 2016 · 4.25 FIP	26	SU	4.25	19.1%	13.9%	1.8%	.284	3.54	21.4%	8.8%	112	-0.71	3.01	226	83
Graeme Stinson L 2023 · 4.85 FIP	25	SU	4.85	19.5%	15.6%	2.6%	.302	—	—	—	—	—	3.56	146	81
Trey Jeans L 2022 · 5.09 FIP	26	SU	5.09	22.3%	16.5%	3.3%	.291	—	—	—	—	—	2.74	111	81
Matt Thornton L 2004 · 4.18 FIP	27	SU	4.18	20.3%	16.2%	1.4%	.304	4.18	21.8%	11.5%	167	-0.00	1.71	663	81
Mitchell Tyranski L 2024 · 4.90 FIP	26	SU	4.90	21.0%	12.3%	3.7%	.234	3.46	20.5%	4.0%	57	-1.44	3.46	145	81
Juan Grullon L 2016 · 4.64 FIP	26	SU	4.64	19.8%	10.9%	3.3%	.305	—	—	—	—	—	4.64	134	80
Will Lamb L 2017 · 5.78 FIP	26	SU	5.78	20.0%	14.0%	4.7%	.322	—	—	—	—	—	3.64	178	79
Nick Hagadone L 2012 · 4.74 FIP	26	SU	4.74	22.4%	12.9%	3.5%	.310	3.88	24.6%	14.7%	82	-0.86	2.97	141	79
Andrew Walling L 2024 · 4.05 FIP	24	SU	4.05	23.4%	13.2%	2.3%	.281	3.73	20.8%	7.5%	52	-0.32	3.14	161	79
Brad Kuntz L 2018 · 4.10 FIP	26	SU	4.10	20.9%	11.7%	2.4%	.352	—	—	—	—	—	2.35	197	79
Hector Mercado L 2000 · 4.79 FIP	26	SU	4.79	21.7%	13.3%	3.3%	.270	4.22	22.9%	10.0%	111	-0.57	3.47	125	79
Trey Cumbie L 2022 · 5.07 FIP	26	SU	5.07	23.3%	16.1%	3.4%	.215	—	—	—	—	—	3.44	152	78
Andy Fisher L 2022 · 4.20 FIP	26	SU	4.20	21.5%	15.4%	1.8%	.333	4.25	17.2%	6.3%	52	+0.05	3.13	167	78
Russell Smith L 2024 · 4.00 FIP	25	SU	4.00	19.0%	13.9%	1.4%	.266	—	—	—	—	—	4.00	175	78
Brian Moran L 2015 · 4.50 FIP	26	SU	4.50	17.7%	14.1%	2.0%	.318	2.74	25.0%	17.4%	80	-1.76	1.80	421	78
Jake Rice L 2023 · 4.41 FIP	26	SU	4.41	23.4%	18.1%	1.8%	.305	4.87	19.0%	4.3%	103	+0.46	3.16	199	78
Sean Mellen L 2022 · 4.01 FIP	24	SU	4.01	21.3%	10.4%	2.5%	.285	—	—	—	—	—	4.01	101	77
Sean Keselica L 2019 · 4.47 FIP	26	SU	4.47	18.0%	14.5%	1.9%	.314	—	—	—	—	—	2.79	235	77
Stephen Randolph L 2003 · 4.83 FIP	29	SU	4.83	18.5%	14.8%	2.6%	.247	5.69	15.8%	-3.0%	82	+0.86	4.83	155	77
Seth Clark L 2024 · 5.66 FIP	24	SU	5.66	18.9%	16.2%	3.9%	.267	4.56	17.7%	-2.7%	32	-1.10	4.23	128	77

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	0.7	49	22.3%	14.6%	1.18	5.10
Armando Almanza ('05)	1.1	54	24.4%	14.3%	1.43	4.82
John Hudek ('99)	1.0	40	23.0%	13.7%	1.30	4.43
Doug Creek ('05)	1.4	58	22.2%	15.1%	1.52	5.32
Dwayne Henry ('84-'95, -1 WAR*)	1.7	67	23.8%*	14.2%*	0.90*	5.02*
Ed Glynn ('75-'85, -0 WAR*)	1.3	53	23.5%*	12.9%*	1.22*	4.69*
Fred Lasher ('63-'71, -1 WAR*)	1.0	50	21.5%*	11.9%*	1.05*	4.68*