With the minor-league season fully in the books, it is befuddling how much has changed since teams broke camp in Arizona or Florida earlier this year. The prospect turnover, the failed injury comebacks, and the sleepers that turned into mainstays are just a few of every season’s constants that make each dynasty year special in their own way. If you have been abreast of the arms on the farm via my PLV updates each week, you know there are a few names that stay in the conversation for having special stuff, and just a few who hold a high place in the public esteem, but just don’t have the PLV numbers to back it up. On the flip side, there are some pitching dynasty prospects that have come under greater scrutiny as the season marched on, thanks to how they fare in PLV’s eyes.
But why does it all matter?
Even if you are the most educated and thoughtful Pitcher List reader, the direct link between PLV and dynasty success could remain fuzzy. The metric isn’t designed to say who will or won’t be atop your dynasty rotation in the years to come, rather who has a better chance to do so. If you need a refresher or just a better handle on the ins and outs of PLV, Nick Pollack and Kyle Bland had an in-depth breakdown of the stat at PitchCon.
Are you ready for a thought train? Here we go.
As the saying goes, correlation doesn’t equal causation. Things like pool drownings and nuclear energy production, or master’s degrees awarded and box office revenue, have a strong correlation in America, but common sense says that one does not cause the other. There are other underlying attributes that link the two. For example, all four of the aforementioned measurements could be associated with population growth. But the previous examples aren’t in the same room together when it comes to measurements. Are they even in the same house, city, or county? I wanted to see what the correlation was between average PLV and the top dynasty performers in 2025, and see how we can take that as some food for thought into 2026.
For reference, these rankings are from my dynasty league, using innings pitched (IP), strikeouts (K), Earned Run Average (ERA), Walks And Hits Per Inning Pitched (WHIP), Saves Plus Holds (SVH), and Wins Plus Quality Starts (W+QS).
Setting the Field
Below are the top 20 scoring starting pitchers using the aforementioned stats.
| Player | IP | K | ERA | WHIP | SVH | W+QS |
| Shohei Ohtani | 47 | 62 | 2.87 | 1.043 | 0 | 2 |
| Tarik Skubal | 195.1 | 241 | 2.21 | 0.891 | 0 | 34 |
| Garrett Crochet | 205.1 | 255 | 2.59 | 1.028 | 0 | 40 |
| Paul Skenes | 187.2 | 216 | 1.97 | 0.948 | 0 | 30 |
| Bryan Woo | 186.2 | 198 | 2.94 | 0.927 | 0 | 36 |
| Hunter Brown | 185.1 | 206 | 2.43 | 1.025 | 0 | 33 |
| Cristopher Sánchez | 196.1 | 204 | 2.57 | 1.085 | 0 | 35 |
| Yoshinobu Yamamoto | 173.2 | 201 | 2.49 | 0.99 | 0 | 30 |
| Carlos Rodón | 195.1 | 203 | 3.09 | 1.049 | 0 | 36 |
| Max Fried | 195.1 | 189 | 2.86 | 1.101 | 0 | 39 |
| Nick Pivetta | 181.2 | 190 | 2.87 | 0.985 | 0 | 32 |
| Freddy Peralta | 174.2 | 201 | 2.68 | 1.071 | 0 | 30 |
| Zack Wheeler | 149.2 | 195 | 2.71 | 0.935 | 0 | 26 |
| Nathan Eovaldi | 130 | 129 | 1.73 | 0.854 | 0 | 25 |
| Jacob deGrom | 172.2 | 185 | 2.97 | 0.921 | 0 | 26 |
| Logan Webb | 201.2 | 216 | 3.3 | 1.255 | 0 | 36 |
| Joe Ryan | 171 | 194 | 3.47 | 1.041 | 0 | 27 |
| Matthew Boyd | 179.2 | 154 | 3.21 | 1.091 | 0 | 31 |
| Kevin Gausman | 189.1 | 184 | 3.47 | 1.03 | 0 | 26 |
| Jesús Luzardo | 183.2 | 216 | 3.92 | 1.22 | 0 | 33 |
Now, managers know that Shohei Ohtani as a pitcher alone was not very valuable this season due to injury, but he sits atop the rankings due to his prowess at the plate. For the sake of looking towards the 2026 season, let’s keep the Los Angeles Dodgers star in this conversation.
Now, using our handy dandy notebook PL Pro Tools, let’s look at how each of those players ranks when it comes to their four-seam PLA and overall PLV rank.
| Player | IP | K | ERA | WHIP | SVH | W+QS | 4S PLA | Average PLV Rank |
| Shohei Ohtani | 47 | 62 | 2.87 | 1.043 | 0 | 2 | 3.69 | 23 |
| Tarik Skubal | 195.1 | 241 | 2.21 | 0.891 | 0 | 34 | 2.9 | 12 |
| Garrett Crochet | 205.1 | 255 | 2.59 | 1.028 | 0 | 40 | 3.94 | 19 |
| Paul Skenes | 187.2 | 216 | 1.97 | 0.948 | 0 | 30 | 3.46 | 6 |
| Bryan Woo | 186.2 | 198 | 2.94 | 0.927 | 0 | 36 | 2.72 | 12 |
| Hunter Brown | 185.1 | 206 | 2.43 | 1.025 | 0 | 33 | 4.16 | 88 |
| Cristopher Sánchez | 196.1 | 204 | 2.57 | 1.085 | 0 | 35 | NULL | 5 |
| Yoshinobu Yamamoto | 173.2 | 201 | 2.49 | 0.99 | 0 | 30 | 2.97 | 4 |
| Carlos Rodón | 195.1 | 203 | 3.09 | 1.049 | 0 | 36 | 3.88 | 53 |
| Max Fried | 195.1 | 189 | 2.86 | 1.101 | 0 | 39 | 3.82 | 28 |
| Nick Pivetta | 181.2 | 190 | 2.87 | 0.985 | 0 | 32 | 3.34 | 12 |
| Freddy Peralta | 174.2 | 201 | 2.68 | 1.071 | 0 | 30 | 3.03 | 19 |
| Zack Wheeler | 149.2 | 195 | 2.71 | 0.935 | 0 | 26 | 2.47 | 1 |
| Nathan Eovaldi | 130 | 129 | 1.73 | 0.854 | 0 | 25 | 3.29 | 25 |
| Jacob deGrom | 172.2 | 185 | 2.97 | 0.921 | 0 | 26 | 2.65 | 2 |
| Logan Webb | 201.2 | 216 | 3.3 | 1.255 | 0 | 36 | 5.91 | 4 |
| Joe Ryan | 171 | 194 | 3.47 | 1.041 | 0 | 27 | 2.26 | 16 |
| Matthew Boyd | 179.2 | 154 | 3.21 | 1.091 | 0 | 31 | 4.02 | 53 |
| Kevin Gausman | 189.1 | 184 | 3.47 | 1.03 | 0 | 26 | 3.11 | 28 |
| Jesús Luzardo | 183.2 | 216 | 3.92 | 1.22 | 0 | 33 | 4.19 | 19 |
Wow. I was expecting something, but not expecting that. Of course, with only 25 points separating 1st to 53rd, there are several ties and little room for error in the overall PLV rankings. I was surprised to see Houston Astros pitcher Hunter Brown so low, considering his results. There seemed to be little to no correlation between a player’s overall PLV ranking and how they finished the season in fantasy, but let’s plot it out just to be sure.
Even by taking out the outliers, there is little correlation between the two. So much for the easy answer there. So what could it be? A pitcher’s four-seam PLA rank has no correlation to their fantasy rank either, something that I thought would be an easier stab in the dark. But, as fastball usage is down in 2025 from their 2024 levels, perhaps having a potent fastball isn’t everything it once was. But what is the secret sauce? What is the formula? If only we had that for most of baseball, we wouldn’t be playing the games anymore, would we?
The Numbers, Mason
I have a hunch.
| Player | Number of pitches in PLV 75th Percentile or Greater |
| Shohei Ohtani | 2 |
| Tarik Skubal | 3 |
| Garrett Crochet | 2 |
| Paul Skenes | 4 |
| Bryan Woo | 2 |
| Hunter Brown | 0 |
| Cristopher Sánchez | 2 |
| Yoshinobu Yamamoto | 4 |
| Carlos Rodón | 0 |
| Max Fried | 3 |
| Nick Pivetta | 3 |
| Freddy Peralta | 2 |
| Zack Wheeler | 3 |
| Nathan Eovaldi | 4 |
| Jacob deGrom | 3 |
| Logan Webb | 3 |
| Joe Ryan | 1 |
| Matthew Boyd | 1 |
| Kevin Gausman | 2 |
| Jesús Luzardo | 2 |
Looking at the top fantasy producers, it seemed that they had multiple great pitches. Not elite, but very far above league average. I thought that three was the magic number, but pitchers with three or more great PLV pitches only accounted for three of the top 10. Still, having two or more is a pretty good hit rate, considering they make up 80% of my league’s top 20 scorers and Brown and Carlos Rodón just continue to confound me. They both had statistically very good seasons, but their pitch-level metrics are hardly the best in the league.
I keep going down this rabbit hole, asking the question of how PLV relates to fantasy value? After all, it is easy to say that if Player A finished top in scoring and had X amount of great pitches according to PLV, then Prospect A with a similar arsenal should be a viable fantasy starter. But, there are plenty of MLB starters with one or two elite offerings, and they don’t land in the top options for scoring. Chris Paddack and JP Sears are two guys who come to mind, who ranked 174th and 171st in fantasy scoring respectively. Yet they both rank in the top in the top 20 for overall PLV in 2025. Just because a pitcher has good stuff doesn’t mean they will have good results.
But for a pitcher to get good results, do they need to have good stuff?
Think about it. Out of the top 20 players I listed, 18 of them had at least one great pitch according to PLV, with 16 of those having at least two such pitches. The year-over-year nature of fantasy always opens the door to guys like Rodon and Brown having good years without fitting the normal mold, but it isn’t a stretch to say that this sample shows having multiple great PLV pitches is a step in the right direction for an elite fantasy pitcher. Maybe when we are looking at pitchers and seeing who could be good fantasy options, that is where PLV comes in to narrow the field.
This is also a good point to remember that PLV is not a results-based metric, rather a process-based one. I pulled up Noah Schultz’s PLV cards earlier this season (woof are they still bad) and my initial thoughts on the matter was to explain it away by poor results. High xwOBA’s gaudy walk rates, things like that. But remember what makes up PLV. The pitcher controls all of those before the batter can ever make contact with the pitch. The frequent results are that a pitcher with bad PLV will have bad results, a pitcher with good PLV may have bad results, but a pitcher with bad PLV will rarely have good results.
All this to say that PLV should not be the end-all, be-all for deciding who to target in drafts, trades, or on the waiver wires. A good mark or impressive arsenal should increase the odds that pitcher will be a meaningful contributor, but it is not a 100% hit rate, and there is no silver bullet in the fantasy world. I could pick up a pitcher like Paddack just looking at his PLV numbers and have unfair expectations, all while ignoring his role hampering his fantasy value or the questionable sequencing that is entirely amendable. Context is still king, but PLV does provide some of the nuance that should set expectations.
Application to Dynasty
First and foremost, I think PLV would be very valuable in determining how long a player can keep their current performance going. I am more likely to believe that Yoshinobu Yamamoto or Max Fried will be better fantasy options than Brown or Rodon, with PLV being a factor, for example. With better PLV scores, the ceiling rises and the floor somewhat rises, just not at the same rate. The variance for outcomes widens, but betting on that strong production to continue (when healthy) is thanks to PLV.
The prospect aspect seems much more tricky. I can pull up Thomas White’s and Andrew Painter’s Triple-A PLV numbers and see two very different pitchers according to PLV, but the expected outcomes for each player are similar according to evaluators. Painter has three pitches right now that are well above average according to PLV, and the Philadelphia Phillies will be hard-pressed to keep him in Triple-A in 2026. Meanwhile, White only has one pitch that is marginally above average in his short Triple-A stay. Both players have similar totals in starts, appearances, and innings pitched, so why does PLV matter between these two? I would use it like a gauge on when or how aggressive to be about the respective player. Despite their similarities, Painter’s PLV makes me believe he is not only closer to The Show, but closer to fantasy relevance than White. PLV is something that could be used to determine timelines or points to buy on a respective prospect.
Lastly, down on the farm, I think PLV could be the sign of when to move on from a player entirely. A player that comes to mind is Bobby Miller. There is a reasonable school of thought to hold to him. He is succeeding, with the prospect pedigree and being in the Los Angeles Dodgers organization. It was only two seasons ago that he was a top-10 right-handed pitching prospect according to MLB Pipeline. But go look at his PLV numbers. None of his offerings are approaching league average, much less the threshold of multiple great pitches to be fantasy relevant. The results in 2025, whether at Triple-A or MLB are scary enough. If managers haven’t cut bait yet, looking at what Miller can control and what he lacks in that realm should be the reason for moving on ahead of 2026.
Conclusion
Well, I asked if you were ready for a thought train. I never said it would be in a straight line.
This isn’t all just a manufactured narrative either. I started from that point, wondering what secret trait all pitchers could share that would translate to top-tier fantasy production. But that wasn’t the case. Each pitcher is as different as the next down the list. They can have four near-elite pitches or none, and still find themselves as very valuable fantasy assets. But, the path to being consistently fantasy viable seems to have multiple great PLV pitches as one of the key steps. Not the first one, not the final one, but a key step nonetheless. PLV can also be useful in determining a player’s progress, track to viability, and ultimately whether or not managers should hold on to them. There are several stats that we can sort Triple-A pitchers into bins by, trying to find those gems that could be worth stashing in the minor-league squad. But PLV is a translatable, process-based matric that will help managers more than other metrics. It isn’t a perfect stat or one that tells the entire story, but rather a strong part of the toolbox any dynasty manager out there needs to prevail in their dynasty league.
