
#40 C · Rays
Height
5'11"
Weight
198 lbs
Age
29
College
N/A
Experience
5 yrs
Bats/Throws
R/R
Grade Nick Fortes
Your grade joins the crowd-sourced Fan Verdict.
On the field, Nick Fortes grades out as a poor C for Rays (F Performance). That places him 82nd of 92 graded catchers. The money matches the play — the Contract Value Index lands at F, a significant overpay. The public read is negative (D Sentiment), drawn from current news and social signal rather than the box score.
| Year | Team | GP | AVG | HR | RBI | OPS | SB | H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Career | ![]() | 440 | 0.22823331 | 29 | 116 | 0.6261918 | 11 | 270 |
| 2026 | ![]() | 48 | .252 | 1 | 13 | .610 | 0 | 35 |
| 2025 |
Length
1 year
Total Value
$2.5M
Guaranteed
$1.5M
AAV
$2.5M/yr
Production at catcher earns Nick Fortes a F performance grade in the current MLB sample. Through 48 games in the 2026 season, Fortes is hitting .252 with just one home run and 19 strikeouts, a statistical profile that reflects a player struggling to generate consistent offensive impact at a position where run production matters significantly. His lone bright spot—the occasional well-timed RBI single, as evidenced by recent headlines—stands in stark contrast to the broader hitting line, which reveals a player unable to drive the ball or maintain a disciplined plate approach. At 29 and six seasons into his career, Fortes occupies the role the Rays designed for him: a defensively reliable, cost-controlled complementary piece alongside Christian Bethancourt, which the organization publicly embraced heading into the year. The media framing pegs him as functional rather than impactful—valued for pitch-framing and game-calling rather than offensive contributions—and the 2026 numbers have done nothing to elevate that assessment. What keeps this grade from being a categorical indictment is that the Rays' early-season success (currently 40-25 and the #1 seed in the AL East) suggests Tampa Bay is winning despite, not because of, his offensive floor, which aligns with how insiders view his actual utility to a competitive roster.
Other same-position deals the Contract Value Index also places in the F band — a quick read on where Nick's contract sits relative to comparable money.
Nick Fortes ranks 82nd of 92 graded catchers by performance. That slots Nick between Victor Caratini (F) just ahead and Keibert Ruiz (F) just behind.
Graded higher
Victor CaratiniTwinsFChuckie RobinsonDodgersFAramis GarciaDiamondbacksFGraded lower
Keibert RuizNationals| Date | OPP | Result | AB | H | R | HR | RBI | BB | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wed, 6/17 | @ LAD | L 0-1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tue, 6/16 | @ LAD | L 3-4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Auto-moderated fan forum with 5-minute speaker turns
Loading discussion...
Nick Fortes is a player in his 5th MLB season listed at C for the Rays. FanVerdicts covers every MLB player, team, GM, and transaction — and puts your verdict on all of it. Sign in to cast your Fan Verdict on Nick Fortes, see where the crowd lands, and argue the call. FanVerdicts also brings its own read — performance, sentiment, and Contract Value Index — as one honest input alongside the crowd's. Where FanVerdicts has weighed in so far: Contract Value Index F, Performance F, Sentiment D.
The crowd's Fan Verdict moves in real time as fans vote on this profile. FanVerdicts' own read updates as new data lands — performance recalculates when MLB game stats post, sentiment shifts with media coverage and fan discussion, and the Contract Value Index recomputes when contract terms change. Contract details below show the structure (years, total value, average annual value, guarantees) behind the Contract Value Index read.
For league-wide context, the MLB hub has team rankings, GM report cards, the transactions feed, and live scoreboards. The MLB player rankings page sorts every active player by performance and contract value within their position.
![]() |
| 59 |
| .240 |
| 2 |
| 10 |
| .637 |
| 0 |
| 31 |
| 2025 | ![]() | 38 | .213 | 3 | 11 | .655 | 1 | 19 |
| 2025 | 97 | .229 | 5 | 21 | .645 | 1 | 50 |
| 2024 | ![]() | 110 | .227 | 4 | 29 | .577 | 0 | 70 |
| 2023 | ![]() | 108 | .204 | 6 | 26 | .562 | 4 | 60 |
| 2022 | ![]() | 72 | .230 | 9 | 24 | .696 | 5 | 50 |
| 2021 | ![]() | 14 | .290 | 4 | 7 | 1.030 | 1 | 9 |
Peers ranked by Performance grade among players at the same position. Tap any name for their full profile.
| Wed, 6/10 | vs BOS | W 7-5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tue, 6/9 | vs BOS | W 4-3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Mon, 6/8 | vs BOS | W 3-1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Sat, 6/6 | @ MIA | L 3-4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Fri, 6/5 | @ MIA | W 6-0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Wed, 6/3 | vs DET | L 2-7 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |