Riley Martin

P Chicago Cubs

Age 29 LHP 6'1" / 215 lbs MLB peak 0.2 · 2027 ILInjured 60-Day (D60)

Overview

MLBRPIL-6040-MANROOKIE

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	26	AAACHC	43	0	60	4.48	3.56	32.7%	15.8%	—	K 28.2% · BB 14.2% · FIP 3.73
2025	27	AAACHC	47	1	64	2.69	3.05	30.7%	13.4%	—	K 26.4% · BB 12.1% · FIP 3.23
2026	28	MIX2 levels	10	2	12	2.19	3.75	31.2%	8.3%	0.1	K 31.2% · BB 8.3% · FIP 3.80
2027PROJ	29	MLBCHC	27	0	28	4.37	4.37	26.9%	13.4%	0.1
2028PROJ74% MLB	30	MLBCHC	39	0	41	4.47	4.54	26.2%	13.3%	0.0
2029PROJ79% MLB	31	MLBCHC	34	0	36	4.62	4.72	25.6%	13.3%	-0.1

Last 3 seasons WAR 0.1 · Next 3 projected WAR -0.0Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 -0.1 / P90 0.3, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 98%

CompsEdward Paredes (age 29) · Clay Rapada (age 30) · Raul Valdes (age 32)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 100108vR 116

ERA4.37

FIP4.37

K%26.9%

BB%13.4%

K-BB%13.5%

Proj IP41

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 41 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)
2021	23	A MLE	Myrtle Beach Pelicans	8	0	15	66	21	10	3	0%	1.8	23.5%	17.9%	5.7%	6.0%	5.52	6.69	—
2021	23	A RAW	Myrtle Beach Pelicans	8	0	15	66	21	10	3	0%	1.8	31.8%	15.2%	16.7%	4.5%	5.52	4.94	—
2022	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	31	1	83	351	120	43	4	3%	2.7	23.6%	14.8%	8.8%	1.8%	3.38	3.95	—
2022	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	31	1	83	351	120	43	4	3%	2.7	34.2%	12.3%	21.9%	1.1%	3.38	2.39	—
2023	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	44	0	58	267	95	43	6	0%	1.3	29.1%	16.6%	12.5%	2.5%	4.32	4.13	—
2023	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	44	0	58	267	95	43	6	0%	1.3	35.6%	16.1%	19.5%	2.2%	4.32	3.39	—
2024	26	AAA MLE	Iowa Cubs	43	0	60	278	91	44	6	0%	1.4	28.2%	14.2%	13.9%	2.2%	4.48	3.73	—
2024	26	AAA MLE	Iowa Cubs	43	0	60	278	91	44	6	0%	1.4	28.2%	14.2%	13.9%	2.2%	4.48	3.73	—
2024	26	AAA RAW	Iowa Cubs	43	0	60	278	91	44	6	0%	1.4	32.7%	15.8%	16.9%	2.2%	4.48	3.56	—
2025	27	AAA MLE	Iowa Cubs	47	1	64	261	80	35	4	2%	1.4	26.4%	12.1%	14.3%	1.5%	2.69	3.23	—
2025	27	AAA MLE	Iowa Cubs	47	1	64	261	80	35	4	2%	1.4	26.4%	12.1%	14.3%	1.5%	2.69	3.23	—
2025	27	AAA RAW	Iowa Cubs	47	1	64	261	80	35	4	2%	1.4	30.7%	13.4%	17.2%	1.5%	2.69	3.05	—
2026	28	MIX MLE	2 levels	10	2	12	48	15	4	2	20%	1.2	31.2%	8.3%	22.9%	4.2%	2.19	3.80	+0.1
2026	28	MIX MLE	2 levels	10	2	12	48	15	4	2	20%	1.2	31.2%	8.3%	22.9%	4.2%	2.19	3.80	+0.1
2026	28	MIX RAW	2 levels	10	2	12	48	15	4	2	20%	1.2	31.2%	8.3%	22.9%	4.2%	2.19	3.75	+0.1
▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded)
MLB Career	—			8	1	8	31	10	2	1	12%	1.0	32.3%	6.5%	25.8%	3.2%	2.16	2.98	+0.2
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	29	MLB	CHC	27	0	28	118	32	16	3	0%	1.0	26.9%	13.4%	13.5%	2.7%	4.37	4.37	+0.1
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	30	MLB MLE	CHC	52	0	55	231	61	31	7	0%	1.1	26.2%	13.3%	12.9%	2.9%	4.47	4.54	+0.0
2029	31	MLB MLE	CHC	44	0	46	195	50	26	6	0%	1.0	25.6%	13.3%	12.2%	3.1%	4.62	4.72	-0.1
2028	30	MLB CTX	CHC	39	0	41	173	45	23	5	0%	1.1	26.2%	13.3%	12.9%	2.9%	4.47	4.54	+0.0
2029	31	MLB CTX	CHC	34	0	36	152	39	20	5	0%	1.1	25.6%	13.3%	12.2%	3.1%	4.62	4.72	-0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		81	1	85	355	94	45	11	1%	1.1	26.4%	12.7%	13.7%	3.0%	4.31	4.14	+0.4
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		191	2	200	835	221	106	26	1%	1.0	26.4%	12.7%	13.7%	3.0%	4.31	4.14	+1.0
Career	—	MLE		183	4	292	1271	338	183	29	2%	1.6	26.6%	14.4%	12.2%	2.3%	3.70	3.93	+0.1
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		125	3	200	871	232	125	20	2%	1.6	26.6%	14.4%	12.2%	2.3%	3.70	3.93	+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.

2025 AAAIowa Cubs · 64 IPFIP 3.05 → 3.23 (+0.17)K% 30.7% → 26.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	30.65%	—	×0.860	26.36%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.41%	—	×0.900	12.07%
HR / BF /BF	1.53%	÷1.125	×1.100	1.50%

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 125).

Result: FIP 3.05 → 3.23, 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).

2024 AAAIowa Cubs · 60 IPFIP 3.53 → 3.73 (+0.21)K% 32.7% → 28.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	32.73%	—	×0.860	28.15%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	15.83%	—	×0.900	14.24%
HR / BF /BF	2.16%	÷1.079	×1.100	2.20%

Result: FIP 3.53 → 3.73, 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 AATennessee Smokies · 46 IPFIP 2.39 → 3.30 (+0.91)K% 39.6% → 32.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	39.59%	—	×0.810	32.07%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.21%	—	×1.100	15.63%
HR / BF /BF	1.52%	÷1.082	×1.200	1.69%

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 116).

Result: FIP 2.39 → 3.30, 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 AAAIowa Cubs · 12 IPFIP 6.12 → 6.46 (+0.34)K% 24.3% → 20.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.29%	—	×0.860	20.89%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	21.43%	—	×0.900	19.29%
HR / BF /BF	4.29%	÷0.965	×1.100	4.88%

Result: FIP 6.12 → 6.46, 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+South Bend Cubs · 69 IPFIP 2.86 → 3.95 (+1.08)K% 30.7% → 23.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	30.69%	—	×0.770	23.63%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.87%	—	×1.150	14.80%
HR / BF /BF	1.32%	÷0.938	×1.250	1.76%

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 88).

Result: FIP 2.86 → 3.95, 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 AMyrtle Beach Pelicans · 13 IPFIP -0.59 → 0.83 (+1.42)K% 56.2% → 41.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	56.25%	—	×0.740	41.62%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.33%	—	×1.180	9.83%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.942	×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 88).

Result: FIP -0.59 → 0.83, 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 AMyrtle Beach Pelicans · 15 IPFIP 4.83 → 6.69 (+1.87)K% 31.8% → 23.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	31.82%	—	×0.740	23.55%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	15.15%	—	×1.180	17.88%
HR / BF /BF	4.55%	÷0.977	×1.300	6.05%

Result: FIP 4.83 → 6.69, 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).

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
Riley Martin (OGILVIE)	—	—	—	—	—	2.7%	—	4.62	25.9%	12.6%	101	+0.25	—	—	—
Edward Paredes L 2016 · 3.47 FIP	29	SU	3.47	24.1%	13.0%	1.4%	.225	3.55	23.7%	14.0%	86	+0.08	2.36	130	76
Clay Rapada L 2011 · 4.34 FIP	30	SU	4.34	26.1%	10.1%	3.9%	.268	3.00	24.5%	14.2%	38	-1.34	3.00	120	75
Raul Valdes L 2010 · 4.02 FIP	32	SU	4.02	21.4%	9.9%	2.7%	.301	3.14	27.4%	22.5%	78	-0.88	2.29	160	73
Nick Hagadone L 2015 · 3.65 FIP	29	SU	3.65	22.6%	8.9%	2.4%	.329	3.74	22.6%	13.3%	33	+0.09	2.97	141	71
Colton Johnson L 2024 · 3.92 FIP	26	SU	3.92	20.8%	11.0%	2.1%	.309	4.53	12.2%	-0.4%	48	+0.61	3.92	106	70
Sammy Solís L 2018 · 4.39 FIP	29	SU	4.39	24.9%	9.6%	4.0%	.330	4.05	26.2%	17.3%	23	-0.34	2.51	190	70
Armando Almanza L 2002 · 4.34 FIP	29	SU	4.34	30.0%	11.6%	4.2%	.272	5.01	21.8%	12.0%	62	+0.67	2.90	211	70
Sam Moll L 2021 · 4.62 FIP	29	SU	4.62	26.5%	13.5%	3.8%	.310	2.95	25.1%	16.8%	143	-1.67	2.38	507	70
Kyle Regnault L 2018 · 3.82 FIP	29	SU	3.82	27.6%	9.7%	3.3%	.367	—	—	—	—	—	2.88	204	70
Tim Byrdak L 2005 · 3.45 FIP	31	SU	3.45	23.7%	15.3%	0.8%	.329	4.31	22.0%	10.7%	100	+0.86	2.85	320	69
Josh Smoker L 2018 · 3.66 FIP	29	SU	3.66	22.1%	8.4%	2.5%	.318	6.58	14.2%	3.4%	14	+2.92	2.71	230	68
Doug Creek L 2000 · 4.57 FIP	31	SU	4.57	27.5%	13.6%	3.8%	.267	4.75	21.9%	7.8%	132	+0.18	4.48	277	68
Dario Alvarez L 2018 · 3.47 FIP	29	SU	3.47	20.7%	12.4%	1.0%	.250	—	—	—	—	—	3.47	160	68
Keith Hessler L 2018 · 4.96 FIP	29	SU	4.96	19.8%	13.3%	3.4%	.348	—	—	—	—	—	3.31	228	67
Josh Edgin L 2016 · 3.64 FIP	29	SU	3.64	22.1%	13.2%	1.3%	.359	3.81	23.2%	13.6%	80	+0.17	2.62	195	67
Ryan Verdugo L 2015 · 3.61 FIP	28	SU	3.61	19.8%	10.8%	1.5%	.281	3.36	22.7%	17.3%	82	-0.25	3.36	153	67
Andrew Barbosa L 2017 · 4.67 FIP	29	SU	4.67	20.2%	9.6%	3.8%	.301	—	—	—	—	—	2.70	175	67
Jack Taschner L 2007 · 3.69 FIP	29	SU	3.69	23.0%	12.2%	1.8%	.286	4.41	16.2%	5.2%	97	+0.72	3.14	189	66
Jesse Biddle L 2021 · 3.35 FIP	29	SU	3.35	30.2%	12.6%	2.2%	.330	—	—	—	—	—	3.35	311	66
Jake Diekman L 2016 · 3.23 FIP	29	SU	3.23	26.7%	11.3%	1.7%	.241	3.09	28.6%	15.8%	115	-0.14	2.27	592	66

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	0.8	52	26.5%	13.0%	1.12	4.36
Mac Scarce ('72-'78, 1 WAR*)	1.0	52	25.9%*	12.4%*	1.27*	4.17*
Chad Fox ('09)	1.1	57	25.8%	13.2%	0.87	3.79
John Hudek ('99)	1.0	40	23.0%	13.7%	1.30	4.43
José Cisnero ('24)	1.4	46	24.0%	11.3%	1.01	4.16
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*