Luis Martinez-Gomez

P Knoxville Smokies

Age 24 RHP 6'0" / 178 lbs AA

Overview

AAPROSPECT

ETA2029MLB%2%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	21	MIX2 levels	10	4	34	2.94	3.31	22.1%	10.3%	—	K 13.9% · BB 15.4% · FIP 5.22
2025	22	MIX2 levels	37	0	55	1.46	2.72	28.8%	14.4%	—	K 21.5% · BB 16.9% · FIP 3.76
2026	23	MIX3 levels	16	10	62	3.94	4.38	25.2%	10.3%	—	K 20.0% · BB 12.3% · FIP 5.73
2027PROJ	24	MLBCHC	1	0	1	5.32	5.32	20.4%	13.9%	-0.0
2028PROJ32% MLB	25	MLBCHC	13	0	14	5.11	5.04	21.1%	12.4%	-0.1
2029PROJ52% MLB	26	MLBCHC	19	0	20	5.00	4.97	21.5%	12.2%	-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 -0.2 / P90 2.5, comp-based) · star 2% · didn't stick 89%

CompsJarret Whorff (age 24) · Nick Hull (age 24) · Orlando Ortiz-Mayr (age 24)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 134126vR 118

ERA5.32

FIP5.32

K%20.4%

BB%13.9%

K-BB%6.4%

Proj IP57

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 57 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	20	MIX MLE	2 levels	4	0	5	29	5	8	1	0%	1.2	17.2%	27.6%	-10.3%	3.4%	21.21	7.03	—
2023	20	MIX RAW	2 levels	4	0	5	29	5	8	1	0%	1.2	17.2%	27.6%	-10.3%	3.4%	21.21	8.89	—
2024	21	MIX MLE	2 levels	10	4	34	145	32	15	2	40%	3.4	13.9%	15.4%	-1.4%	2.5%	2.94	5.22	—
2024	21	MIX MLE	2 levels	10	4	34	145	32	15	2	40%	3.4	13.9%	15.4%	-1.4%	2.5%	2.94	5.22	—
2024	21	MIX RAW	2 levels	10	4	34	145	32	15	2	40%	3.4	22.1%	10.3%	11.7%	1.4%	2.94	3.31	—
2025	22	MIX MLE	2 levels	37	0	55	236	68	34	1	0%	1.5	21.5%	16.9%	4.6%	0.6%	1.46	3.76	—
2025	22	MIX MLE	2 levels	37	0	55	236	68	34	1	0%	1.5	21.5%	16.9%	4.6%	0.6%	1.46	3.76	—
2025	22	MIX RAW	2 levels	37	0	55	236	68	34	1	0%	1.5	28.8%	14.4%	14.4%	0.4%	1.46	2.72	—
2026	23	MIX MLE	3 levels	16	10	62	262	66	27	10	62%	3.9	20.0%	12.3%	7.7%	5.0%	3.94	5.73	—
2026	23	MIX MLE	3 levels	16	10	62	262	66	27	10	62%	3.9	20.0%	12.3%	7.7%	5.0%	3.94	5.73	—
2026	23	MIX RAW	3 levels	16	10	62	262	66	27	10	62%	3.9	25.2%	10.3%	14.9%	3.8%	3.94	4.38	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	24	MLB	CHC	1	0	1	4	1	1	0	0%	1.0	20.4%	13.9%	6.4%	3.3%	5.32	5.32	-0.0
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	25	MLB MLE	CHC	41	0	44	184	39	23	6	0%	1.1	21.1%	12.4%	8.7%	3.2%	5.11	5.04	-0.2
2029	26	MLB MLE	CHC	37	0	39	164	35	20	5	0%	1.0	21.5%	12.2%	9.3%	3.2%	5.00	4.97	-0.2
2028	25	MLB CTX	CHC	13	0	14	59	12	7	2	0%	1.1	21.1%	12.4%	8.7%	3.2%	5.11	5.04	-0.1
2029	26	MLB CTX	CHC	19	0	20	84	18	10	3	0%	1.1	21.5%	12.2%	9.3%	3.2%	5.00	4.97	-0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		32	0	34	144	31	18	5	0%	1.1	21.3%	12.3%	9.1%	3.2%	5.04	4.62	-0.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		190	0	200	844	182	106	29	0%	1.1	21.3%	12.3%	9.1%	3.2%	5.04	4.62	-0.2
Career	—	MLE		67	14	155	672	128	102	19	21%	2.3	19.1%	15.2%	3.8%	2.8%	3.36	4.98	-0.4
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		86	18	200	865	165	132	25	21%	2.3	19.1%	15.2%	3.8%	2.8%	3.36	4.98	-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 AAKnoxville Smokies · 50 IPFIP 4.73 → 5.73 (+1.00)K% 24.7% → 20.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.65%	—	×0.810	19.97%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.16%	—	×1.100	12.28%
HR / BF /BF	4.19%	÷1.000	×1.200	5.02%

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 4.73 → 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).

2026 ROKACL Cubs · 6 IPFIP 4.24 → 5.95 (+1.71)K% 23.1% → 15.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.08%	—	×0.680	15.69%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.69%	—	×1.250	9.62%
HR / BF /BF	3.85%	÷1.000	×1.400	5.38%

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 100).

Result: FIP 4.24 → 5.95, 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).

2026 AMyrtle Beach Pelicans · 6 IPFIP 0.89 → 1.73 (+0.84)K% 33.3% → 24.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	33.33%	—	×0.740	24.67%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.76%	—	×1.180	5.62%
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 0.89 → 1.73, 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).

2025 AMyrtle Beach Pelicans · 38 IPFIP 3.07 → 4.30 (+1.23)K% 31.1% → 23.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	31.14%	—	×0.740	23.04%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	17.96%	—	×1.180	21.20%
HR / BF /BF	0.60%	÷0.925	×1.300	0.84%

Result: FIP 3.07 → 4.30, 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).

2025 A+South Bend Cubs · 17 IPFIP 1.88 → 2.44 (+0.56)K% 23.2% → 17.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.19%	—	×0.770	17.86%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	5.80%	—	×1.150	6.67%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.106	×1.250	0.00%

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 121).

Result: FIP 1.88 → 2.44, 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).

2024 ROKACL Cubs · 28 IPFIP 3.83 → 5.22 (+1.39)K% 20.5% → 13.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.49%	—	×0.680	13.93%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.30%	—	×1.250	15.37%
HR / BF /BF	1.64%	÷0.935	×1.400	2.45%

Result: FIP 3.83 → 5.22, 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 AMyrtle Beach Pelicans · 6 IPFIP 0.53 → 1.20 (+0.67)K% 30.4% → 22.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	30.43%	—	×0.740	22.52%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	0.00%	—	×1.180	0.00%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷0.908	×1.300	0.00%

Result: FIP 0.53 → 1.20, 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).

2023 AMyrtle Beach Pelicans · 4 IPFIP 7.67 → 9.52 (+1.85)K% 16.7% → 12.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	16.67%	—	×0.740	12.33%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	29.17%	—	×1.180	34.42%
HR / BF /BF	4.17%	÷0.957	×1.300	5.66%

Result: FIP 7.67 → 9.52, 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).

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
Luis Martinez-Gomez (OGILVIE)	—	—	—	—	—	3.3%	—	5.01	21.3%	9.0%	82	-0.31	—	—	—
Jarret Whorff R 2023 · 4.24 FIP	24	SW	4.24	19.5%	14.2%	1.8%	.287	4.34	19.4%	10.8%	193	+0.10	3.88	257	88
Nick Hull R 2024 · 4.62 FIP	24	SW	4.62	19.0%	12.2%	2.9%	.296	5.00	16.8%	6.2%	111	+0.38	4.26	292	86
Orlando Ortiz-Mayr R 2022 · 4.61 FIP	24	SU	4.61	21.0%	13.2%	2.9%	.341	4.74	15.7%	4.0%	343	+0.13	3.65	492	85
Austin Vernon R 2023 · 5.75 FIP	24	SW	5.75	22.1%	16.8%	4.3%	.325	3.68	23.3%	10.0%	100	-2.07	3.37	261	82
Brad Deppermann R 2021 · 4.51 FIP	25	SW	4.51	17.1%	9.6%	3.0%	.289	3.52	20.0%	7.8%	45	-0.99	1.94	143	82
Hayden Snelsire R 2024 · 5.10 FIP	23	SU	5.10	18.9%	13.8%	3.4%	.272	4.28	20.0%	13.7%	135	-0.82	3.83	178	82
Grant Black R 2021 · 4.46 FIP	27	SW	4.46	19.0%	13.9%	2.2%	.327	5.35	15.0%	3.8%	156	+0.89	4.46	215	81
Victor Santos R 2001 · 4.97 FIP	24	SW	4.97	15.5%	13.4%	2.7%	.231	4.38	16.4%	7.4%	206	-0.59	4.09	602	81
Grant Ford R 2021 · 5.78 FIP	23	SW	5.78	20.1%	13.2%	4.9%	.300	4.61	19.0%	4.5%	112	-1.17	3.83	188	81
Ryan Zeferjahn R 2022 · 4.45 FIP	24	SW	4.45	21.0%	12.4%	2.8%	.325	4.36	27.3%	13.8%	163	-0.09	3.05	349	80
Dylan Spacke R 2022 · 5.24 FIP	24	SU	5.24	16.1%	13.9%	3.2%	.297	4.79	13.6%	0.2%	52	-0.45	2.08	205	80
Peyton Pallette R 2024 · 4.38 FIP	23	SW	4.38	20.7%	10.9%	3.0%	.309	3.59	25.9%	13.5%	119	-0.79	3.54	273	80
Heath Slatton R 2017 · 5.56 FIP	23	SW	5.56	17.9%	12.9%	4.3%	.382	—	—	—	—	—	2.46	120	79
Danny Kirwin R 2024 · 4.19 FIP	24	SW	4.19	17.9%	9.9%	2.4%	.262	5.33	16.8%	4.6%	91	+1.14	4.16	161	79
Tanner Burns R 2023 · 5.27 FIP	24	SW	5.27	19.4%	12.5%	4.0%	.257	4.95	18.3%	5.2%	131	-0.32	4.34	382	78
Jimmy Kingsbury R 2023 · 5.11 FIP	24	SW	5.11	18.2%	9.9%	4.2%	.304	3.67	18.0%	9.9%	189	-1.44	3.51	330	78
Richard Guasch R 2022 · 4.41 FIP	24	SW	4.41	22.3%	16.2%	2.1%	.287	3.24	23.8%	11.8%	72	-1.17	2.94	316	78
Ross Ohlendorf R 2008 · 4.73 FIP	25	SW	4.73	16.3%	9.3%	3.3%	.357	4.63	15.4%	7.7%	324	-0.10	3.30	617	77
Eric Cerantola R 2024 · 4.65 FIP	24	SW	4.65	25.7%	16.6%	2.9%	.245	3.74	26.2%	15.9%	100	-0.91	3.37	270	77
Tyler Yates R 2004 · 4.47 FIP	26	SW	4.47	15.4%	9.6%	2.6%	.333	3.64	22.5%	13.5%	116	-0.83	3.23	248	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	46	20.9%	13.0%	1.25	5.17
Fred Lasher ('63-'71, -1 WAR*)	1.0	50	21.5%*	11.9%*	1.05*	4.68*
John Hudek ('99)	1.0	40	23.0%	13.7%	1.30	4.43
Bill Wilson ('69-'73, -0 WAR*)	1.3	52	20.3%*	11.5%*	1.13*	4.84*
Gene Harris ('89-'95, -1 WAR*)	1.2	40	20.0%*	12.5%*	0.98*	4.96*
Paul Spoljaric ('00)	1.4	69	22.1%	12.9%	1.33	5.52
Valerio De Los Santos ('08)	1.3	51	18.7%	11.5%	1.30	4.57