Head to head · 2026 ALCS pitching

Nick Martinez vs Cade Smith

In 2026 Nick Martinez has been worth 0.5 more wins. Both lines are computed from play-by-play on the same constants, so they are measured the same way rather than quoted from two sources.

Opponents in the 2026 ALCS, where the Tampa Bay Rays won 4-2 over the Cleveland Guardians.

Nick Martinez TB

Cade Smith CLE

Postseason

Box-score figures only: October is kept out of the season constants, so there is no wOBA, FIP or dbWAR for it.

2026 ALCS.
Statistic	Nick Martinez	Cade Smith
G	1	4
GS	1	0
IP	5.1	4.2
W	1	0
SV	0	1
SO	3	3
BB	2	1
ERA	1.69	3.86
WHIP	0.75	0.64
K/9	5.1	5.8
BB/9	3.4	1.9

Every published postseason, pitching, summed with the rates recomputed from the counts.
Statistic	Nick Martinez	Cade Smith
G	12	21
GS	3	0
IP	27.1	24.2
W	1	2
SV	0	2
SO	23	34
BB	5	6
ERA	2.96	2.55
WHIP	0.91	0.61
K/9	7.6	12.4
BB/9	1.6	2.2

2026 season

2026 pitching. The stronger figure in each row is highlighted — for ERA, FIP, WHIP and walks that is the lower one.
Statistic	Nick Martinez	Cade Smith
G	31	69
GS	31	0
IP	180.0	74.0
W	15	6
SO	109	107
ERA	3.10	1.95
FIP	3.96	2.18
WHIP	1.09	0.96
K/9	5.5	13.0
BB/9	1.3	2.8
FIP−	95	52
WAR	2.7	2.2

Career

Totalled over the seasons published here, which is not the same as a whole career: a player who debuted before 2005 begins at 2005, not at his real first game.

Career pitching totals. ERA, WHIP and the per-nine rates are recomputed from the components rather than averaged; FIP needs each season’s own constant and is left to the season table.
Statistic	Nick Martinez	Cade Smith
G	311	219
GS	160	0
IP	1,120.0	223.0
W	63	20
L	65	7
SV	9	58
SO	779	314
BB	315	59
ERA	3.99	2.26
WHIP	1.27	0.96
K/9	6.3	12.7
BB/9	2.5	2.4
HR/9	1.2	0.4
WAR	6.2	7.4

Nick Martinez’s full profile →Cade Smith’s full profile →

More head to heads

The same seasons, measured against somebody else.

Nick Martinez vs

Cade Smith vs

How these are computed

FIP uses the constant solved from this season’s own runs, and FIP− is park-adjusted against the same league. dbWAR is our own open implementation — not fWAR or bWAR — and the full derivation, including its simplifications, is on the methodology page. To put these two beside a third, the comparison page takes up to four.