Hyun-Seok Jang

P Ontario Tower Buzzers

Age 23 RHP 6'3" / 200 lbs A Svc 0.0 · Ctrl thru 2034 peak 0.7 · 2029

Overview

APROSPECTMiLBFA 2035

OGV OFP40OGV rank#331ETA2029MLB%0%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	20	MIX2 levels	18	15	37	6.14	3.02	41.0%	16.3%	—	K 28.2% · BB 20.1% · FIP 6.03
2025	21	ALAA	13	13	41	4.65	4.08	30.9%	18.3%	—	K 22.8% · BB 21.6% · FIP 5.45
2026	22	MIX2 levels	20	18	81	5.42	3.06	29.4%	8.7%	—	K 22.0% · BB 10.3% · FIP 4.30
2027PROJ	23	MLBLAD	—	—	0	4.75	4.75	24.4%	13.3%	—
2028PROJ30% MLB	24	MLBLAD	5	5	30	4.66	4.59	25.0%	12.1%	0.3
2029PROJ51% MLB	25	MLBLAD	9	9	53	4.53	4.46	25.3%	11.3%	0.6

Next 3 projected WAR 0.9Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

ContractESTIMATED

Control thru2034Service0.0First FA2035

2027MiLB2028MiLB2029Pre-Arb$0.8M2030Pre-Arb$0.8M2031Pre-Arb$0.9M2032Arb-1$2M2033Arb-2$3M2034Arb-3$3M

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 -0.3 / P90 7.4, comp-based) · star 3% · didn't stick 86%

CompsDavid Festa (age 23) · CJ Van Eyk (age 22) · Dinelson Lamet (age 23)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 123115vR 107

ERA4.75

FIP4.75

K%24.4%

BB%13.3%

K-BB%11.0%

Proj IP90

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 90 IP

━ projected WAR━ paid WAR ($/8M) surplus deficit+$28M ctrl surplus

Contract

Contract ESTIMATED · service-time + WAR-based estimator (needs verification)

Status MiLB

MLB Debut 2029

Service 0 yrs (est)

Team Control Through 2034

First FA Year 2035

Year	Status	Salary	Proj WAR	Value	Surplus
2027	MiLB	still in minors · estimated debut 2029
2028	MiLB	still in minors · estimated debut 2029
2029	Pre-Arb	$0.8M	+0.6	$2M	+$1M
2030	Pre-Arb	$0.8M	+0.9	$3M	+$2M
2031	Pre-Arb	$0.9M	+0.9	$3M	+$2M
2032	Arb-1	$2M	+0.9	$2M	+$1M
2033	Arb-2	$3M	+0.7	$2M	+$0.2M
2034	Arb-3	$3M	+0.5	$1M	+$0.0M (cut)
Totals		$8M		$13M	+$7M

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)
2024	20	MIX MLE	2 levels	18	15	37	166	68	27	4	83%	2.0	28.2%	20.1%	8.1%	5.0%	6.14	6.03	—
2024	20	MIX MLE	2 levels	18	15	37	166	68	27	4	83%	2.0	28.2%	20.1%	8.1%	5.0%	6.14	6.03	—
2024	20	MIX RAW	2 levels	18	15	37	166	68	27	4	83%	2.0	41.0%	16.3%	24.7%	2.4%	6.14	3.02	—
2025	21	A MLE	Rancho Cucamonga Quakes	13	13	41	175	54	32	4	100%	3.1	22.8%	21.6%	1.3%	2.8%	4.65	5.45	—
2025	21	A MLE	Rancho Cucamonga Quakes	13	13	41	175	54	32	4	100%	3.1	22.8%	21.6%	1.3%	2.8%	4.65	5.45	—
2025	21	A RAW	Rancho Cucamonga Quakes	13	13	41	175	54	32	4	100%	3.1	30.9%	18.3%	12.6%	2.3%	4.65	4.08	—
2026	22	MIX MLE	2 levels	20	18	81	367	108	32	9	90%	4.1	22.0%	10.3%	11.7%	3.2%	5.42	4.30	—
2026	22	MIX MLE	2 levels	20	18	81	367	108	32	9	90%	4.1	22.0%	10.3%	11.7%	3.2%	5.42	4.30	—
2026	22	MIX RAW	2 levels	20	18	81	367	108	32	9	90%	4.1	29.4%	8.7%	20.7%	2.5%	5.42	3.06	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	23	MLB	LAD	—	—	0	—	—	—	—	—	—	24.4%	13.3%	11.0%	3.0%	4.75	4.75	—
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	24	MLB MLE	LAD	18	18	99	416	104	50	12	100%	5.5	25.0%	12.1%	12.9%	3.0%	4.59	4.52	+1.0
2029	25	MLB MLE	LAD	18	18	104	441	112	50	13	100%	5.8	25.3%	11.3%	14.0%	3.0%	4.46	4.39	+1.2
2030	26	MLB MLE	LAD	18	18	110	467	119	52	14	100%	6.1	25.4%	11.1%	14.3%	3.0%	4.40	4.36	+1.3
2031	27	MLB MLE	LAD	18	18	107	453	115	50	14	100%	6.0	25.3%	11.1%	14.3%	3.0%	4.39	4.39	+1.3
2032	28	MLB MLE	LAD	17	17	102	432	109	48	13	100%	6.0	25.2%	11.2%	14.0%	3.1%	4.44	4.48	+1.1
2033	29	MLB MLE	LAD	16	16	95	402	100	46	13	100%	6.0	25.0%	11.4%	13.5%	3.3%	4.54	4.61	+0.9
2034	30	MLB MLE	LAD	14	14	86	365	90	43	13	100%	6.2	24.6%	11.7%	12.9%	3.5%	4.69	4.78	+0.6
2035	31	MLB MLE	LAD	13	13	77	326	79	39	12	100%	5.9	24.2%	12.1%	12.1%	3.7%	4.87	4.99	+0.4
2036	32	MLB MLE	LAD	11	11	68	287	68	36	11	100%	6.2	23.8%	12.5%	11.3%	3.9%	5.08	5.21	+0.1
2028	24	MLB CTX	LAD	5	5	30	127	32	15	4	100%	6.0	25.0%	12.1%	12.9%	3.1%	4.66	4.59	+0.3
2029	25	MLB CTX	LAD	9	9	53	224	57	25	7	100%	5.9	25.3%	11.3%	14.0%	3.1%	4.53	4.46	+0.6
2030	26	MLB CTX	LAD	12	12	72	304	77	34	9	100%	6.0	25.4%	11.1%	14.3%	3.1%	4.47	4.43	+0.9
2031	27	MLB CTX	LAD	13	13	79	334	84	37	10	100%	6.1	25.3%	11.1%	14.3%	3.1%	4.46	4.46	+0.9
2032	28	MLB CTX	LAD	14	14	81	342	86	38	11	100%	5.8	25.2%	11.2%	14.0%	3.2%	4.51	4.55	+0.9
2033	29	MLB CTX	LAD	13	13	79	334	83	38	11	100%	6.1	25.0%	11.4%	13.5%	3.4%	4.62	4.69	+0.7
2034	30	MLB CTX	LAD	12	12	74	312	77	37	11	100%	6.2	24.6%	11.7%	12.9%	3.6%	4.77	4.86	+0.5
2035	31	MLB CTX	LAD	11	11	68	287	70	35	11	100%	6.2	24.2%	12.1%	12.1%	3.8%	4.96	5.08	+0.3
2036	32	MLB CTX	LAD	10	10	61	258	61	32	11	100%	6.1	23.8%	12.5%	11.3%	4.1%	5.17	5.30	+0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		100	100	596	2516	626	291	86	100%	6.0	24.9%	11.5%	13.3%	3.4%	4.67	4.33	+7.5
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		34	34	200	844	210	98	29	100%	6.0	24.9%	11.5%	13.3%	3.4%	4.67	4.33	+2.5
Career	—	MLE		51	46	159	708	167	109	25	90%	3.1	23.7%	15.4%	8.3%	3.5%	5.39	4.99	+8.0
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		64	58	200	892	211	137	32	90%	3.1	23.7%	15.4%	8.3%	3.5%	5.39	4.99	+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 AOntario Tower Buzzers · 67 IPFIP 3.57 → 4.88 (+1.31)K% 27.8% → 20.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	27.78%	—	×0.740	20.56%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.48%	—	×1.180	11.18%
HR / BF /BF	2.94%	÷1.000	×1.300	3.82%

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 3.57 → 4.88, 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 A+Great Lakes Loons · 14 IPFIP 0.54 → 1.36 (+0.83)K% 37.7% → 29.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	37.70%	—	×0.770	29.03%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.92%	—	×1.150	5.66%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.000	×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 100).

Result: FIP 0.54 → 1.36, 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 ARancho Cucamonga Quakes · 41 IPFIP 4.07 → 5.45 (+1.39)K% 30.9% → 22.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	30.86%	—	×0.740	22.83%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	18.29%	—	×1.180	21.58%
HR / BF /BF	2.29%	÷1.055	×1.300	2.82%

Result: FIP 4.07 → 5.45, 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 Dodgers · 24 IPFIP 3.49 → 6.03 (+2.54)K% 41.5% → 28.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	41.53%	—	×0.680	28.24%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	16.10%	—	×1.250	20.13%
HR / BF /BF	3.39%	÷0.942	×1.400	5.04%

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 88).

Result: FIP 3.49 → 6.03, 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 ARancho Cucamonga Quakes · 12 IPFIP 1.87 → 3.12 (+1.25)K% 39.6% → 29.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	39.58%	—	×0.740	29.29%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	16.67%	—	×1.180	19.67%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.072	×1.300	0.00%

Result: FIP 1.87 → 3.12, 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
Hyun-Seok Jang (OGILVIE)	—	—	—	—	—	3.0%	—	4.42	25.3%	13.8%	314	-0.33	—	—	—
David Festa R 2023 · 3.68 FIP	23	SP	3.68	24.5%	11.2%	2.2%	.341	3.71	27.2%	19.1%	209	+0.03	3.67	405	83
CJ Van Eyk R 2021 · 4.79 FIP	22	SP	4.79	21.8%	12.7%	3.5%	.302	4.64	15.2%	5.3%	127	-0.15	4.18	457	83
Dinelson Lamet R 2015 · 4.36 FIP	23	SP	4.36	20.1%	11.8%	2.7%	.272	3.69	24.2%	13.1%	293	-0.67	2.11	778	82
Brody McCullough R 2023 · 3.58 FIP	23	SP	3.58	23.1%	10.3%	2.1%	.267	4.45	21.3%	11.7%	42	+0.87	3.58	129	82
James Proctor R 2021 · 3.99 FIP	23	SP	3.99	22.0%	15.2%	1.5%	.277	4.39	14.0%	1.5%	48	+0.40	3.99	109	82
Bryce Conley R 2018 · 4.71 FIP	23	SP-	4.71	20.2%	12.2%	3.2%	.269	4.88	17.4%	3.3%	197	+0.17	4.22	560	81
Cade Smith R 2024 · 3.86 FIP	22	SP	3.86	23.2%	13.3%	1.9%	.273	5.35	18.2%	6.6%	157	+1.49	3.86	243	81
Noah Denoyer R 2021 · 4.51 FIP	23	SP-	4.51	21.5%	12.1%	3.1%	.275	4.10	25.7%	15.7%	121	-0.41	3.26	181	81
Ryan Jensen R 2021 · 4.86 FIP	23	SP	4.86	21.4%	10.8%	4.0%	.236	4.48	22.0%	5.1%	180	-0.38	3.92	311	81
Drew Rasmussen R 2019 · 3.64 FIP	24	SP-	3.64	24.6%	12.6%	1.9%	.312	3.21	22.7%	16.2%	237	-0.43	1.21	694	81
Will Sanders R 2024 · 4.95 FIP	22	SP	4.95	19.3%	11.8%	3.6%	.297	4.11	20.1%	12.5%	173	-0.84	3.92	266	80
Josh Bostick R 2024 · 4.65 FIP	22	SP	4.65	19.3%	11.2%	3.2%	.304	5.40	21.7%	12.6%	119	+0.75	4.65	226	80
Patrick Reilly R 2024 · 4.96 FIP	22	SP	4.96	23.2%	13.6%	3.8%	.242	5.00	27.8%	20.2%	40	+0.04	4.96	159	80
River Ryan R 2022 · 3.69 FIP	23	SP	3.69	26.1%	12.2%	2.3%	.321	3.88	20.3%	9.2%	134	+0.19	2.44	223	80
Levi Wells R 2024 · 4.35 FIP	22	SP	4.35	20.0%	12.1%	2.6%	.360	3.82	19.0%	10.2%	132	-0.53	3.70	192	79
Ian Bedell R 2023 · 3.73 FIP	23	SP-	3.73	21.0%	10.1%	2.1%	.285	5.56	18.8%	9.0%	178	+1.83	3.73	274	79
Kyle Nicolas R 2022 · 4.41 FIP	23	SP	4.41	21.0%	13.3%	2.5%	.266	3.96	23.4%	11.8%	227	-0.45	3.25	464	79
Jimmy Endersby R 2021 · 4.29 FIP	23	SP-	4.29	20.9%	14.1%	2.1%	.310	5.71	16.3%	4.2%	225	+1.42	2.86	357	79
Kyle Bradish R 2019 · 4.56 FIP	22	SP-	4.56	20.8%	13.7%	2.7%	.309	3.84	24.1%	14.7%	238	-0.72	2.20	750	79
Max Bain R 2021 · 5.21 FIP	23	SP	5.21	20.5%	15.2%	3.5%	.291	6.70	16.7%	-3.9%	81	+1.49	5.21	174	79

Career Comps

Completed MLB careers (no pro action in 2+ yrs) whose totals — actual + projected — most resemble this player's. Pool: 2,161 pitcher careers (1,251 from 1990-2025 + 910 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	4.7	94	24.9%	11.7%	1.23	4.59
Wayne Twitchell ('70-'79, 4 WAR*)	5.3	133	24.2%*	11.3%*	1.16*	4.56*
Bobby Castillo ('77-'85, 5 WAR*)	3.4	86	22.3%*	11.3%*	1.23*	4.27*
David West ('88-'98, 1 WAR*)	2.8	71	22.1%*	12.1%*	1.28*	4.79*
Jonathan Sánchez ('13)	3.9	112	22.8%	12.5%	1.04	4.70
Brad Peacock ('21)	2.8	93	24.7%	10.1%	1.27	4.11
Héctor Santiago ('21)	4.7	105	20.7%	10.6%	1.38	4.12