Head to head · 2026 pitching

Michael Grove vs Hunter Harvey

So far in 2026 the two have been worth the same -0.2 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.

Michael Grove TB

Hunter Harvey CHC

2026 pitching, season in progress. The stronger figure in each row is highlighted — for ERA, FIP, WHIP and walks that is the lower one.
Statistic	Michael Grove	Hunter Harvey
G	3	4
GS	0	0
IP	7.0	4.0
W	1	0
SO	6	4
ERA	5.14	6.75
FIP	6.96	8.35
WHIP	1.00	1.50
K/9	7.7	9.0
BB/9	0.0	2.3
FIP−	166	199
WAR	-0.2	-0.2

Career

Totalled over the seasons published here, which is not the same as a whole career: a player who debuted before 2015 begins at 2015, 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 table above.
Statistic	Michael Grove	Hunter Harvey
G	67	186
GS	20	0
IP	156.1	189.0
W	8	10
L	7	12
SV	0	11
SO	157	205
BB	45	52
ERA	5.47	3.19
WHIP	1.36	1.11
K/9	9.0	9.8
BB/9	2.6	2.5
HR/9	1.6	0.9
WAR	0.8	3.2

Michael Grove’s full profile →Hunter Harvey’s full profile →

More head to heads

The same seasons, measured against somebody else.

Michael Grove vs

Hunter Harvey 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.