Logan Workman

P Durham Bulls

Age 28 RHP 6'4" / 215 lbs AAA peak 0.9 · 2027

Overview

AAAPROSPECT

ETA2029MLB%10%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	25	MIX2 levels	29	28	146	2.96	3.18	23.1%	7.4%	—	K 18.9% · BB 7.7% · FIP 3.82
2025	26	AAATB	29	28	152	4.02	4.29	24.4%	7.2%	—	K 21.0% · BB 6.5% · FIP 4.05
2026	27	AAATB	31	16	104	5.64	4.19	23.4%	10.8%	—	K 20.1% · BB 9.7% · FIP 4.41
2027PROJ	28	MLBTB	3	3	16	4.44	4.44	20.4%	7.5%	0.2
2028PROJ37% MLB	29	MLBTB	8	8	50	4.49	4.55	20.3%	7.7%	0.5
2029PROJ55% MLB	30	MLBTB	11	11	65	4.61	4.70	20.1%	8.0%	0.5

Next 3 projected WAR 1.2Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Scouting grades · 20-80

Stuff50Control60Command55

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 -0.5 / P90 0.2, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 96%

CompsPatrick Johnson (age 27) · Hector Velázquez (age 28) · Shawn Haviland (age 29)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 118109vR 101

ERA4.44

FIP4.44

K%20.4%

BB%7.5%

K-BB%13.0%

Proj IP165

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 165 IP

Grades · Contract

Scouting Grades

STUF5050

CTRL6060

CMD5555

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	22	ROK MLE	FCL Rays	6	2	10	41	14	5	0	33%	1.7	34.1%	12.2%	22.0%	0.0%	0.87	1.76	—
2021	22	ROK RAW	FCL Rays	6	2	10	41	14	5	0	33%	1.7	34.1%	12.2%	22.0%	0.0%	0.87	1.84	—
2022	23	MIX MLE	2 levels	26	25	114	453	115	29	13	96%	4.4	19.3%	7.4%	11.9%	3.5%	2.93	4.33	—
2022	23	MIX RAW	2 levels	26	25	114	453	115	29	13	96%	4.4	25.4%	6.4%	19.0%	2.9%	2.93	3.33	—
2023	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	18	17	70	296	78	22	7	94%	3.9	20.9%	8.4%	12.5%	2.8%	3.73	3.94	—
2023	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	18	17	70	296	78	22	7	94%	3.9	26.4%	7.4%	18.9%	2.4%	3.73	3.11	—
2024	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	29	28	146	597	138	44	12	97%	5.0	18.9%	7.7%	11.2%	2.4%	2.96	3.82	—
2024	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	29	28	146	597	138	44	12	97%	5.0	18.9%	7.7%	11.2%	2.4%	2.96	3.82	—
2024	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	29	28	146	597	138	44	12	97%	5.0	23.1%	7.4%	15.7%	2.0%	2.96	3.18	—
2025	26	AAA MLE	Durham Bulls	29	28	152	623	152	45	27	97%	5.3	21.0%	6.5%	14.5%	3.5%	4.02	4.05	—
2025	26	AAA MLE	Durham Bulls	29	28	152	623	152	45	27	97%	5.3	21.0%	6.5%	14.5%	3.5%	4.02	4.05	—
2025	26	AAA RAW	Durham Bulls	29	28	152	623	152	45	27	97%	5.3	24.4%	7.2%	17.2%	4.3%	4.02	4.29	—
2026	27	AAA MLE	Durham Bulls	31	16	104	474	111	51	14	52%	3.3	20.1%	9.7%	10.5%	3.2%	5.64	4.41	—
2026	27	AAA MLE	Durham Bulls	31	16	104	474	111	51	14	52%	3.3	20.1%	9.7%	10.5%	3.2%	5.64	4.41	—
2026	27	AAA RAW	Durham Bulls	31	16	104	474	111	51	14	52%	3.3	23.4%	10.8%	12.7%	3.0%	5.64	4.19	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	28	MLB	TB	3	3	16	68	14	5	2	100%	5.3	20.4%	7.5%	13.0%	3.2%	4.44	4.44	+0.2
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	29	MLB MLE	TB	22	22	135	570	116	44	19	100%	6.1	20.3%	7.7%	12.6%	3.3%	4.49	4.55	+1.3
2029	30	MLB MLE	TB	20	20	117	494	99	40	17	100%	5.9	20.1%	8.0%	12.1%	3.5%	4.61	4.70	+0.9
2030	31	MLB MLE	TB	17	17	104	437	87	36	16	100%	6.1	19.8%	8.3%	11.5%	3.7%	4.76	4.88	+0.6
2031	32	MLB MLE	TB	15	15	91	383	74	33	15	100%	6.1	19.4%	8.7%	10.7%	3.9%	4.95	5.09	+0.3
2028	29	MLB CTX	TB	8	8	50	211	43	16	7	100%	6.2	20.3%	7.7%	12.6%	3.3%	4.49	4.55	+0.5
2029	30	MLB CTX	TB	11	11	65	274	55	22	10	100%	5.9	20.1%	8.0%	12.1%	3.5%	4.61	4.70	+0.5
2030	31	MLB CTX	TB	12	12	70	296	59	25	11	100%	5.8	19.8%	8.3%	11.5%	3.7%	4.76	4.88	+0.4
2031	32	MLB CTX	TB	12	12	69	291	57	25	11	100%	5.8	19.4%	8.7%	10.7%	3.9%	4.95	5.09	+0.2
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		42	42	254	1070	213	88	39	100%	6.0	19.9%	8.2%	11.6%	3.6%	4.72	4.45	+2.8
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		33	33	200	844	168	69	31	100%	6.0	19.9%	8.2%	11.6%	3.6%	4.72	4.45	+2.2
Career	—	MLE		139	116	596	2484	503	196	76	83%	4.3	20.2%	7.9%	12.4%	3.0%	3.74	4.06	+3.2
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		47	39	200	834	169	66	25	83%	4.3	20.2%	7.9%	12.4%	3.0%	3.74	4.06	+1.4

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 AAADurham Bulls · 104 IPFIP 4.11 → 4.41 (+0.30)K% 23.4% → 20.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.42%	—	×0.860	20.14%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.76%	—	×0.900	9.68%
HR / BF /BF	2.95%	÷1.000	×1.100	3.25%

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 100).

Result: FIP 4.11 → 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).

2025 AAADurham Bulls · 152 IPFIP 4.33 → 4.05 (−0.29)K% 24.4% → 21.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.40%	—	×0.860	20.98%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.22%	—	×0.900	6.50%
HR / BF /BF	4.33%	÷1.380	×1.100	3.45%

Result: FIP 4.33 → 4.05, 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 AAMontgomery Biscuits · 123 IPFIP 3.14 → 3.87 (+0.73)K% 22.7% → 18.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.67%	—	×0.810	18.36%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	6.68%	—	×1.100	7.35%
HR / BF /BF	2.02%	÷0.958	×1.200	2.54%

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 92).

Result: FIP 3.14 → 3.87, 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 AAADurham Bulls · 23 IPFIP 3.39 → 3.59 (+0.20)K% 25.2% → 21.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.24%	—	×0.860	21.71%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.68%	—	×0.900	9.61%
HR / BF /BF	1.94%	÷1.061	×1.100	2.01%

Result: FIP 3.39 → 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).

2023 AAMontgomery Biscuits · 63 IPFIP 3.28 → 3.94 (+0.66)K% 25.8% → 20.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.82%	—	×0.810	20.91%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.64%	—	×1.100	8.40%
HR / BF /BF	2.55%	÷1.087	×1.200	2.81%

Result: FIP 3.28 → 3.94, 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 0.89 → 1.94 (+1.05)K% 33.3% → 22.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	33.33%	—	×0.680	22.67%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.76%	—	×1.250	5.95%
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 0.89 → 1.94, 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+Bowling Green Hot Rods · 90 IPFIP 4.08 → 5.07 (+1.00)K% 22.0% → 16.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.01%	—	×0.770	16.95%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.07%	—	×1.150	8.12%
HR / BF /BF	3.53%	÷1.020	×1.250	4.33%

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 104).

Result: FIP 4.08 → 5.07, 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 ACharleston RiverDogs · 23 IPFIP 0.17 → 1.13 (+0.96)K% 40.0% → 29.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	40.00%	—	×0.740	29.60%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	3.53%	—	×1.180	4.16%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.943	×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 89).

Result: FIP 0.17 → 1.13, 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
Logan Workman (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.44	20.4%	7.5%	3.2%	—	4.70	20.1%	12.1%	356	+0.26	—	—	—
Patrick Johnson R 2016 · 3.82 FIP	27	SP-	3.82	17.3%	6.9%	2.4%	.286	4.14	15.7%	6.4%	120	+0.32	3.82	248	82
Hector Velázquez R 2017 · 3.65 FIP	28	SP-	3.65	18.0%	6.6%	2.2%	.251	4.28	16.7%	7.4%	158	+0.63	2.75	536	78
Shawn Haviland R 2015 · 3.95 FIP	29	SP-	3.95	14.6%	6.0%	2.4%	.303	4.67	16.1%	8.8%	169	+0.72	3.69	283	75
Austin Bibens-Dirkx R 2015 · 3.97 FIP	30	SP	3.97	17.4%	7.1%	2.6%	.315	4.94	15.9%	8.7%	305	+0.97	3.97	567	72
Omar Bencomo R 2017 · 4.50 FIP	28	SP-	4.50	18.9%	6.3%	4.0%	.333	4.48	14.9%	10.1%	186	-0.02	3.70	381	72
Braydon Tucker R 2024 · 3.25 FIP	25	SP-	3.25	18.3%	7.1%	1.5%	.291	4.70	15.3%	6.3%	208	+1.45	3.25	314	72
Brian Edgington R 2024 · 3.99 FIP	25	SP	3.99	19.5%	6.5%	3.1%	.321	5.28	19.3%	7.0%	58	+1.29	3.99	171	72
Travis Driskill R 2002 · 4.95 FIP	30	SP-	4.95	13.2%	8.0%	3.6%	.291	4.26	15.3%	12.0%	48	-0.69	4.26	181	70
Fabio Castillo R 2017 · 3.98 FIP	28	SP-	3.98	20.9%	8.8%	2.8%	.291	—	—	—	—	—	3.13	195	70
Mitch Atkins R 2016 · 3.65 FIP	30	SP-	3.65	21.4%	8.2%	2.4%	.341	4.77	14.3%	6.2%	78	+1.12	3.65	215	69
Jordan Pries R 2016 · 4.43 FIP	26	SP-	4.43	17.4%	8.2%	3.2%	.333	—	—	—	—	—	4.29	219	69
Hiram Burgos R 2016 · 4.08 FIP	28	SP	4.08	16.3%	9.1%	2.2%	.330	4.94	19.3%	11.8%	62	+0.86	3.40	384	69
Félix Peña R 2018 · 3.74 FIP	28	SP	3.74	22.3%	8.4%	2.6%	.294	4.58	21.9%	13.5%	191	+0.84	2.79	615	68
Jeremy Guthrie R 2007 · 4.20 FIP	28	SP-	4.20	17.0%	6.2%	3.2%	.267	4.51	13.7%	7.3%	600	+0.31	4.08	1,834	68
Jared Kollar R 2024 · 3.85 FIP	26	SP-	3.85	16.8%	6.4%	2.5%	.298	5.50	11.4%	2.4%	113	+1.65	3.85	345	68
Anthony Ranaudo R 2016 · 5.10 FIP	26	SP	5.10	15.5%	6.1%	4.6%	.255	—	—	—	—	—	4.42	314	68
Deck McGuire R 2017 · 3.41 FIP	28	SP	3.41	20.5%	8.9%	1.7%	.256	5.28	18.4%	5.2%	95	+1.87	3.41	622	68
Paul Clemens R 2016 · 4.58 FIP	28	SP	4.58	17.6%	9.1%	3.3%	.271	4.72	14.9%	3.9%	53	+0.14	4.58	345	68
Hisashi Iwakuma R 2012 · 4.28 FIP	31	SP-	4.28	19.5%	7.7%	3.4%	.277	3.45	21.5%	17.8%	528	-0.83	3.19	884	68
Edgar Alberto Garcia R 2016 · 4.37 FIP	28	SP-	4.37	14.6%	9.8%	2.3%	.311	4.01	17.3%	6.4%	44	-0.36	4.01	272	67

Career Comps

Completed MLB careers (no pro action in 2+ yrs) whose totals — actual + projected — most resemble this player's. Pool: 927 starter careers (497 from 1990-2025 + 430 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	3.1	122	20.1%	8.0%	1.33	4.61
Tyler Anderson ('25)	6.3	126	19.5%	7.8%	1.32	4.30
Colby Lewis ('16)	6.1	135	18.4%	7.2%	1.32	4.70
Mike Fiers ('21)	5.8	128	20.5%	7.0%	1.44	4.07
Mark Gardner ('89-'01, 7 WAR*)	8.8	136	19.6%*	8.0%*	1.44*	4.84*
Tim Leary ('81-'94, 9 WAR*)	7.5	136	18.1%*	8.1%*	1.18*	4.72*
Craig Swan ('73-'84, 10 WAR*)	6.2	124	18.8%*	7.1%*	1.36*	4.46*