Tristan Garnett

P Reading Fightin Phils

Age 29 LHP 6'6" / 240 lbs AA

Overview

AAPROSPECT

MLB%2%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	26	MIX3 levels	34	0	41	2.63	2.90	31.1%	14.4%	—	K 24.4% · BB 15.9% · FIP 3.75
2025	27	MIX3 levels	25	0	31	2.03	2.13	32.4%	11.0%	—	K 27.5% · BB 12.1% · FIP 2.90
2026	28	MIX2 levels	38	0	43	5.86	4.52	21.8%	13.9%	—	K 17.6% · BB 13.2% · FIP 5.17
2027PROJ	29	MLBPHI	—	—	0	4.92	4.92	20.9%	12.6%	—
2028PROJ31% MLB	30	MLBPHI	5	0	5	4.96	5.03	20.8%	12.6%	-0.0

Next 2 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 0.0 / P90 0.0, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 99%

CompsJuan Pablo Perez (age 28) · Jose Meraz (age 29) · Raul Valdes (age 32)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 110119vR 127

ERA4.92

FIP4.92

K%20.9%

BB%12.6%

K-BB%8.3%

Proj IP20

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 20 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	23	ROK MLE	FCL Phillies	7	0	12	62	14	6	2	0%	1.8	15.4%	12.1%	3.3%	4.5%	6.57	5.81	—
2021	23	ROK RAW	FCL Phillies	7	0	12	62	14	6	2	0%	1.8	22.6%	9.7%	12.9%	3.2%	6.57	4.40	—
2022	24	MIX MLE	3 levels	23	0	35	136	49	5	2	0%	1.5	28.7%	4.3%	24.4%	2.3%	1.80	2.50	—
2022	24	MIX RAW	3 levels	23	0	35	136	49	5	2	0%	1.5	36.0%	3.7%	32.4%	1.5%	1.80	1.47	—
2023	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	46	0	51	205	56	18	2	0%	1.1	21.4%	10.0%	11.4%	1.4%	1.94	3.34	—
2023	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	46	0	51	205	56	18	2	0%	1.1	27.3%	8.8%	18.5%	1.0%	1.94	2.47	—
2024	26	MIX MLE	3 levels	34	0	41	180	56	26	2	0%	1.2	24.4%	15.9%	8.5%	1.3%	2.63	3.75	—
2024	26	MIX MLE	3 levels	34	0	41	180	56	26	2	0%	1.2	24.4%	15.9%	8.5%	1.3%	2.63	3.75	—
2024	26	MIX RAW	3 levels	34	0	41	180	56	26	2	0%	1.2	31.1%	14.4%	16.7%	1.1%	2.63	2.90	—
2025	27	MIX MLE	3 levels	25	0	31	136	44	15	1	0%	1.2	27.5%	12.1%	15.4%	1.1%	2.03	2.90	—
2025	27	MIX MLE	3 levels	25	0	31	136	44	15	1	0%	1.2	27.5%	12.1%	15.4%	1.1%	2.03	2.90	—
2025	27	MIX RAW	3 levels	25	0	31	136	44	15	1	0%	1.2	32.4%	11.0%	21.3%	0.7%	2.03	2.13	—
2026	28	MIX MLE	2 levels	38	0	43	202	44	28	5	0%	1.1	17.6%	13.2%	4.4%	3.4%	5.86	5.17	—
2026	28	MIX MLE	2 levels	38	0	43	202	44	28	5	0%	1.1	17.6%	13.2%	4.4%	3.4%	5.86	5.17	—
2026	28	MIX RAW	2 levels	38	0	43	202	44	28	5	0%	1.1	21.8%	13.9%	7.9%	2.5%	5.86	4.52	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	29	MLB	PHI	—	—	0	—	—	—	—	—	—	20.9%	12.6%	8.3%	2.9%	4.92	4.92	—
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	30	MLB MLE	PHI	16	0	16	69	14	9	2	0%	1.0	20.8%	12.6%	8.2%	3.1%	4.96	5.03	-0.1
2028	30	MLB CTX	PHI	5	0	5	21	4	3	1	0%	1.0	20.8%	12.6%	8.2%	3.1%	4.96	5.03	-0.0
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		5	0	5	22	5	3	1	0%	1.0	20.8%	12.6%	8.2%	3.1%	4.96	4.65	-0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	195	117	39	0%	1.1	20.8%	12.6%	8.2%	3.1%	4.96	4.65	-0.2
Career	—	MLE		173	0	213	921	209	106	20	0%	1.2	22.7%	11.5%	11.3%	2.1%	3.12	3.80	-0.1
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		162	0	200	863	196	99	18	0%	1.2	22.7%	11.5%	11.3%	2.1%	3.12	3.80	-1.1

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.

2026 AAReading Fightin Phils · 38 IPFIP 4.35 → 5.17 (+0.81)K% 21.7% → 17.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	21.71%	—	×0.810	17.59%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.00%	—	×1.100	13.20%
HR / BF /BF	2.86%	÷1.000	×1.200	3.43%

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 4.35 → 5.17, 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 AAALehigh Valley IronPigs · 5 IPFIP 4.51 → 4.44 (−0.07)K% 22.2% → 19.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.22%	—	×0.860	19.11%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	25.93%	—	×0.900	23.33%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.000	×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 100).

Result: FIP 4.51 → 4.44, 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 AAReading Fightin Phils · 25 IPFIP 2.13 → 2.90 (+0.76)K% 33.9% → 27.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	33.94%	—	×0.810	27.50%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.01%	—	×1.100	12.11%
HR / BF /BF	0.92%	÷1.036	×1.200	1.06%

Result: FIP 2.13 → 2.90, 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 AClearwater Threshers · 5 IPFIP 1.29 → 2.03 (+0.74)K% 28.6% → 21.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.57%	—	×0.740	21.14%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.76%	—	×1.180	5.62%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.083	×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 117).

Result: FIP 1.29 → 2.03, 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 AAReading Fightin Phils · 38 IPFIP 3.05 → 3.75 (+0.70)K% 30.1% → 24.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	30.12%	—	×0.810	24.40%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.46%	—	×1.100	15.90%
HR / BF /BF	1.20%	÷1.137	×1.200	1.27%

Result: FIP 3.05 → 3.75, 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).

2023 A+Jersey Shore BlueClaws · 38 IPFIP 2.99 → 3.96 (+0.97)K% 23.8% → 18.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.84%	—	×0.770	18.36%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.27%	—	×1.150	10.66%
HR / BF /BF	1.32%	÷0.858	×1.250	1.93%

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 72).

Result: FIP 2.99 → 3.96, 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 AAReading Fightin Phils · 13 IPFIP 0.91 → 1.60 (+0.69)K% 37.0% → 30.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	37.04%	—	×0.810	30.00%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.41%	—	×1.100	8.15%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.050	×1.200	0.00%

Result: FIP 0.91 → 1.60, 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 AClearwater Threshers · 29 IPFIP 1.27 → 2.50 (+1.23)K% 38.7% → 28.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	38.74%	—	×0.740	28.67%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	3.60%	—	×1.180	4.25%
HR / BF /BF	1.80%	÷1.000	×1.300	2.34%

Result: FIP 1.27 → 2.50, 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
Tristan Garnett (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.92	20.9%	12.6%	2.9%	—	5.03	20.8%	8.2%	16	+0.11	—	—	—
Juan Pablo Perez L 2007 · 5.32 FIP	28	SU	5.32	17.5%	14.0%	3.5%	.324	—	—	—	—	—	1.75	104	84
Jose Meraz L 2017 · 4.34 FIP	29	SU	4.34	16.4%	10.3%	2.4%	.282	3.80	10.5%	-2.0%	30	-0.54	3.78	110	82
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	82
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	81
Darin Downs L 2014 · 3.78 FIP	29	SU	3.78	18.2%	11.5%	1.4%	.255	4.06	12.9%	8.7%	16	+0.28	2.83	107	80
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	80
Keith Hessler L 2018 · 4.96 FIP	29	SU	4.96	19.8%	13.3%	3.4%	.348	—	—	—	—	—	3.31	228	80
Colt Hynes L 2013 · 4.76 FIP	28	SU	4.76	15.5%	8.3%	3.5%	.361	3.49	19.3%	12.8%	96	-1.27	3.42	169	77
Andrew Barbosa L 2017 · 4.67 FIP	29	SU	4.67	20.2%	9.6%	3.8%	.301	—	—	—	—	—	2.70	175	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
Mike Zagurski L 2012 · 4.48 FIP	29	SU	4.48	20.9%	11.7%	3.0%	.305	—	—	—	—	—	2.94	120	75
Aaron Brown L 2021 · 4.13 FIP	29	SU	4.13	17.4%	12.8%	1.6%	.275	5.38	21.3%	8.8%	66	+1.25	4.04	269	74
Doug Slaten L 2008 · 4.56 FIP	28	SU	4.56	13.6%	8.8%	2.7%	.264	3.63	19.2%	10.2%	57	-0.93	3.22	139	73
Dan Runzler L 2015 · 3.78 FIP	30	SU	3.78	19.0%	13.1%	1.2%	.383	4.07	16.5%	4.0%	63	+0.29	2.84	187	73
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	73
Tom Martin L 2000 · 4.16 FIP	30	SU	4.16	14.7%	9.1%	2.1%	.274	4.29	21.8%	12.3%	68	+0.12	3.40	303	72
Bryan Harper L 2018 · 4.63 FIP	28	SU	4.63	14.9%	13.9%	1.9%	.288	—	—	—	—	—	4.13	133	72
Braulio Lara L 2017 · 5.80 FIP	28	SU	5.80	19.8%	17.8%	3.9%	.361	—	—	—	—	—	3.96	118	72
Buddy Boshers L 2017 · 4.56 FIP	29	SU	4.56	18.9%	8.0%	3.7%	.300	3.47	24.1%	15.6%	112	-1.09	2.76	239	70
Vic Darensbourg L 2000 · 3.93 FIP	29	SU	3.93	21.5%	9.9%	2.5%	.298	4.26	15.3%	9.6%	97	+0.33	2.94	287	70