Mike Bolsinger
P Toronto Blue Jays| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 27 | MIX2 levels | 31 | 29 | 156 | 3.23 | 3.30 | 24.3% | 9.2% | 4.0 | K 23.2% · BB 9.3% · FIP 3.42 | |
| 2016 | 28 | MIX2 levels | 25 | 14 | 82 | 5.38 | 4.12 | 23.9% | 8.1% | 1.2 | K 21.9% · BB 8.3% · FIP 4.20 | |
| 2017 | 29 | MIX2 levels | 27 | 10 | 89 | 3.84 | 4.07 | 21.5% | 9.3% | 0.5 | K 20.2% · BB 9.4% · FIP 4.26 | |
| 2018 | 30 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2019 | 31 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2020 | 32 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2021 | 33 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2022 | 34 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2023 | 35 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2024 | 36 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2025 | 37 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2026 | 38 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
Statcast · Contract
Contract
No contract data on file. Pre-MLB players and minor-league free agents do not yet have salary projections — entries are added at first 40-man roster placement.
Career Stats + Projections
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) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2014 | 26 | MLB MLE | Arizona Diamondbacks | 10 | 9 | 52 | 238 | 48 | 16 | 7 | 90% | 5.2 | 20.2% | 6.7% | 13.4% | 2.9% | 5.50 | 3.85 | +1.0 |
| 2014 | 26 | MLB RAW | Arizona Diamondbacks | 10 | 9 | 52 | 238 | 48 | 16 | 7 | 90% | 5.2 | 20.2% | 6.7% | 13.4% | 2.9% | 5.50 | 3.92 | +0.9 |
| 2015 | 27 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 31 | 29 | 156 | 653 | 159 | 60 | 13 | 94% | 5.0 | 23.2% | 9.3% | 13.9% | 2.0% | 3.23 | 3.42 | +3.8 |
| 2015 | 27 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 31 | 29 | 156 | 653 | 159 | 60 | 13 | 94% | 5.0 | 24.3% | 9.2% | 15.2% | 2.0% | 3.23 | 3.30 | +4.0 |
| 2016 | 28 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 25 | 14 | 82 | 360 | 86 | 29 | 13 | 56% | 3.3 | 21.9% | 8.3% | 13.5% | 3.4% | 5.38 | 4.20 | +1.2 |
| 2016 | 28 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 25 | 14 | 82 | 360 | 86 | 29 | 13 | 56% | 3.3 | 23.9% | 8.1% | 15.8% | 3.6% | 5.38 | 4.12 | +1.2 |
| 2017 | 29 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 27 | 10 | 89 | 376 | 81 | 35 | 11 | 37% | 3.3 | 20.2% | 9.4% | 10.8% | 3.0% | 3.84 | 4.26 | +0.3 |
| 2017 | 29 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 27 | 10 | 89 | 376 | 81 | 35 | 11 | 37% | 3.3 | 21.5% | 9.3% | 12.2% | 2.9% | 3.84 | 4.07 | +0.5 |
| ▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| MLB Career | — | 48 | 41 | 231 | 1022 | 210 | 93 | 34 | 85% | 4.8 | 20.5% | 9.1% | 11.4% | 3.3% | 4.92 | 4.40 | +2.7 | ||
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 48 | 41 | 231 | 1022 | 210 | 93 | 34 | 85% | 4.8 | 20.5% | 9.1% | 11.4% | 3.3% | 4.92 | 4.34 | +2.9 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 42 | 36 | 200 | 886 | 182 | 81 | 29 | 85% | 4.8 | 20.5% | 9.1% | 11.4% | 3.3% | 4.92 | 4.34 | +2.5 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 93 | 62 | 379 | 1627 | 354 | 142 | 44 | 67% | 4.1 | 21.8% | 8.7% | 13.0% | 2.7% | 4.15 | 3.85 | +2.7 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 49 | 33 | 200 | 858 | 187 | 75 | 23 | 67% | 4.1 | 21.8% | 8.7% | 13.0% | 2.7% | 4.15 | 3.85 | +2.3 | |
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.
2017 AAABuffalo Bisons · 48 IPFIP 2.30 → 2.70 (+0.40)K% 23.3% → 20.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 23.33% | — | ×0.880 | 20.53% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 4.44% | — | ×1.050 | 4.67% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.11% | ÷0.903 | ×1.100 | 1.35% |
Factors used: pitcher AAA level factors — K ×0.88, BB ×1.05, HR ×1.10. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 80).
Result: FIP 2.30 → 2.70, 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).
2016 AAABuffalo Bisons · 54 IPFIP 3.44 → 3.68 (+0.24)K% 25.6% → 22.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 25.63% | — | ×0.880 | 22.55% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 8.82% | — | ×1.050 | 9.26% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.52% | ÷1.164 | ×1.100 | 2.38% |
Factors used: pitcher AAA level factors — K ×0.88, BB ×1.05, HR ×1.10. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 133).
Result: FIP 3.44 → 3.68, 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).
2015 AAAOklahoma City Dodgers · 47 IPFIP 2.15 → 2.70 (+0.55)K% 32.6% → 28.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 32.62% | — | ×0.880 | 28.71% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.63% | — | ×1.050 | 10.11% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.07% | ÷0.866 | ×1.100 | 1.36% |
Factors used: pitcher AAA level factors — K ×0.88, BB ×1.05, HR ×1.10. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 73).
Result: FIP 2.15 → 2.70, 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).