Justin Armbruester
P Binghamton Rumble Ponies| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 25 | AAABAL | 29 | 26 | 119 | 7.54 | 5.58 | 23.4% | 12.3% | — | K 20.2% · BB 11.1% · FIP 5.73 |
| 2025 | 26 | AAABAL | 3 | 0 | 6 | 0.00 | 2.22 | 25.9% | 11.1% | — | K 25.9% · BB 11.1% · FIP 2.32 |
| 2026 | 27 | MIX3 levels | 23 | 0 | 25 | 1.08 | 1.34 | 32.3% | 6.2% | — | K 27.5% · BB 5.6% · FIP 1.49 |
| 2027PROJ | 28 | MLBNYM | — | — | 0 | 4.46 | 4.46 | 22.5% | 9.0% | — | |
| 2028PROJ31% MLB | 29 | MLBNYM | 1 | 1 | 6 | 4.52 | 4.58 | 22.4% | 9.3% | 0.1 |
Grades · Contract
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
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 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 8 | 1 | 9 | 38 | 16 | 6 | 1 | 12% | 1.2 | 42.1% | 15.8% | 26.3% | 2.6% | 1.93 | 2.99 | — |
| 2021 | 22 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 8 | 1 | 9 | 38 | 16 | 6 | 1 | 12% | 1.2 | 42.1% | 15.8% | 26.3% | 2.6% | 1.93 | 2.99 | — |
| 2022 | 23 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 26 | 22 | 117 | 475 | 126 | 34 | 21 | 85% | 4.5 | 21.0% | 8.1% | 12.9% | 4.9% | 3.85 | 5.02 | — |
| 2022 | 23 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 26 | 22 | 117 | 475 | 126 | 34 | 21 | 85% | 4.5 | 26.5% | 7.2% | 19.4% | 4.4% | 3.85 | 4.15 | — |
| 2023 | 24 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 26 | 25 | 121 | 517 | 109 | 51 | 14 | 96% | 4.7 | 17.7% | 9.6% | 8.1% | 2.9% | 3.56 | 4.41 | — |
| 2023 | 24 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 26 | 25 | 121 | 517 | 109 | 51 | 14 | 96% | 4.7 | 21.1% | 9.9% | 11.2% | 2.7% | 3.56 | 4.06 | — |
| 2024 | 25 | AAA MLE | Norfolk Tides | 29 | 26 | 119 | 559 | 131 | 69 | 27 | 90% | 4.1 | 20.2% | 11.1% | 9.0% | 5.3% | 7.54 | 5.73 | — |
| 2024 | 25 | AAA MLE | Norfolk Tides | 29 | 26 | 119 | 559 | 131 | 69 | 27 | 90% | 4.1 | 20.2% | 11.1% | 9.0% | 5.3% | 7.54 | 5.73 | — |
| 2024 | 25 | AAA RAW | Norfolk Tides | 29 | 26 | 119 | 559 | 131 | 69 | 27 | 90% | 4.1 | 23.4% | 12.3% | 11.1% | 4.8% | 7.54 | 5.58 | — |
| 2025 | 26 | AAA MLE | Norfolk Tides | 3 | 0 | 6 | 27 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0% | 1.9 | 25.9% | 11.1% | 14.8% | 0.0% | 0.00 | 2.32 | — |
| 2025 | 26 | AAA MLE | Norfolk Tides | 3 | 0 | 6 | 27 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0% | 1.9 | 25.9% | 11.1% | 14.8% | 0.0% | 0.00 | 2.32 | — |
| 2025 | 26 | AAA RAW | Norfolk Tides | 3 | 0 | 6 | 27 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0% | 1.9 | 25.9% | 11.1% | 14.8% | 0.0% | 0.00 | 2.22 | — |
| 2026 | 27 | MIX MLE | 3 levels | 23 | 0 | 25 | 96 | 31 | 6 | 0 | 0% | 1.1 | 27.5% | 5.6% | 21.9% | 0.0% | 1.08 | 1.49 | — |
| 2026 | 27 | MIX MLE | 3 levels | 23 | 0 | 25 | 96 | 31 | 6 | 0 | 0% | 1.1 | 27.5% | 5.6% | 21.9% | 0.0% | 1.08 | 1.49 | — |
| 2026 | 27 | MIX RAW | 3 levels | 23 | 0 | 25 | 96 | 31 | 6 | 0 | 0% | 1.1 | 32.3% | 6.2% | 26.0% | 0.0% | 1.08 | 1.34 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 28 | MLB | NYM | — | — | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 22.5% | 9.0% | 13.5% | 3.2% | 4.46 | 4.46 | — |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 29 | MLB MLE | NYM | 3 | 3 | 20 | 84 | 19 | 8 | 3 | 100% | 6.7 | 22.4% | 9.3% | 13.1% | 3.3% | 4.52 | 4.58 | +0.2 |
| 2028 | 29 | MLB CTX | NYM | 1 | 1 | 6 | 25 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 100% | 6.0 | 22.4% | 9.3% | 13.1% | 3.3% | 4.52 | 4.58 | +0.1 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 1 | 1 | 6 | 26 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 100% | 6.3 | 22.4% | 9.3% | 13.1% | 3.3% | 4.52 | 4.20 | +0.1 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 33 | 33 | 200 | 844 | 192 | 64 | 32 | 100% | 6.0 | 22.4% | 9.3% | 13.1% | 3.3% | 4.52 | 4.20 | +2.8 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 115 | 74 | 398 | 1712 | 353 | 164 | 69 | 64% | 3.5 | 20.6% | 9.6% | 11.0% | 4.0% | 4.59 | 4.78 | +0.2 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 58 | 37 | 200 | 861 | 178 | 83 | 35 | 64% | 3.5 | 20.6% | 9.6% | 11.0% | 4.0% | 4.59 | 4.78 | +1.9 | |
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 AABinghamton Rumble Ponies · 15 IPFIP 0.88 → 1.49 (+0.61)K% 33.9% → 27.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 33.90% | — | ×0.810 | 27.46% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 5.08% | — | ×1.100 | 5.59% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷1.000 | ×1.200 | 0.00% |
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 0.88 → 1.49, 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).
2026 ASt. Lucie Mets · 6 IPFIP 1.95 → 2.75 (+0.81)K% 27.3% → 20.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 27.27% | — | ×0.740 | 20.18% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.09% | — | ×1.180 | 10.73% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷1.000 | ×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 100).
Result: FIP 1.95 → 2.75, 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 AAANorfolk Tides · 6 IPFIP 2.32 → 2.48 (+0.17)K% 25.9% → 22.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 25.93% | — | ×0.860 | 22.30% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 11.11% | — | ×0.900 | 10.00% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷0.945 | ×1.100 | 0.00% |
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 89).
Result: FIP 2.32 → 2.48, 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 AAANorfolk Tides · 119 IPFIP 5.34 → 5.73 (+0.40)K% 23.4% → 20.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 23.43% | — | ×0.860 | 20.15% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 12.34% | — | ×0.900 | 11.11% |
| HR / BF /BF | 4.83% | ÷0.996 | ×1.100 | 5.33% |
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 99).
Result: FIP 5.34 → 5.73, 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 AAANorfolk Tides · 59 IPFIP 4.39 → 4.73 (+0.34)K% 24.9% → 21.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 24.91% | — | ×0.860 | 21.42% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 12.08% | — | ×0.900 | 10.87% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.40% | ÷0.995 | ×1.100 | 3.75% |
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 99).
Result: FIP 4.39 → 4.73, 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 AABowie Baysox · 62 IPFIP 3.70 → 4.07 (+0.36)K% 17.1% → 13.8%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 17.06% | — | ×0.810 | 13.82% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 7.54% | — | ×1.100 | 8.29% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.98% | ÷1.208 | ×1.200 | 1.97% |
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 142).
Result: FIP 3.70 → 4.07, 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 AABowie Baysox · 63 IPFIP 4.61 → 5.16 (+0.55)K% 24.8% → 20.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 24.80% | — | ×0.810 | 20.09% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 6.30% | — | ×1.100 | 6.93% |
| HR / BF /BF | 5.12% | ÷1.170 | ×1.200 | 5.25% |
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 134).
Result: FIP 4.61 → 5.16, 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).
2022 A+Aberdeen IronBirds · 54 IPFIP 3.71 → 4.85 (+1.14)K% 28.5% → 22.0%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 28.51% | — | ×0.770 | 21.95% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 8.14% | — | ×1.150 | 9.37% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.62% | ÷1.029 | ×1.250 | 4.40% |
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 106).
Result: FIP 3.71 → 4.85, 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).