Jake Bird

P Washington Nationals

Age 31 RHP 6'3" / 215 lbs MLB peak 0.2 · 2027

Overview

MLBRP40-MAN

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	28	MIX3 levels	50	1	55	4.77	5.04	20.1%	12.0%	-0.3	K 18.6% · BB 11.9% · FIP 4.64
2025	29	MIX2 levels	63	0	71	5.70	3.41	27.8%	10.0%	1.0	K 26.8% · BB 9.7% · FIP 3.36
2026	30	MIX2 levels	60	0	55	4.58	3.79	25.8%	7.7%	0.5	K 24.6% · BB 7.5% · FIP 3.90
2027PROJ	31	MLBWSH	41	0	43	4.42	4.28	24.4%	9.2%	0.1
2028PROJ95% MLB	32	MLBWSH	30	0	32	4.49	4.54	23.6%	9.6%	0.0
2029PROJ95% MLB	33	MLBWSH	22	0	23	4.69	4.82	22.8%	10.1%	-0.1

Last 3 seasons WAR 1.1 · Next 3 projected WAR 0.1Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Skills · percentileStatcast 2026

K%59

xwOBA vs44

FB Velo34

CompsChris Hatcher (age 31) · Joe Nelson (age 31) · Mike Broadway (age 31)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 113105vR 97

ERA4.42

FIP4.28

K%24.4%

BB%9.2%

K-BB%15.2%

Proj IP43

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 43 IP

Grades · Statcast · Contract

Scouting Grades

STUF5050

CTRL3535

CMD4040

K†6060

Statcast Percentiles

FB Velo

p3493.4

Whiff%

p6227.1%

p5923.8%

xwOBA vs

p440.318

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

Real MLB stats plus park-adjusted projections — this season (so far / rest / full), then future seasons and career totals.

show model inputsbasis chips: RAW = as recorded · CTX = with park/league context · A+C = actual + context combined · MLE = level/park-neutral

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)
▸ Model inputs — neutral MLE (past 3 seasons + 2027 so far)
2018	22	ROK MLE	Grand Junction Rockies	17	0	27	115	30	12	2	0%	1.6	17.7%	13.0%	4.7%	2.4%	3.38	4.59	—
2018	22	ROK RAW	Grand Junction Rockies	17	0	27	115	30	12	2	0%	1.6	26.1%	10.4%	15.7%	1.7%	3.38	3.18	—
2019	23	A MLE	Asheville Tourists	40	8	97	430	80	41	2	20%	2.4	13.8%	11.3%	2.5%	0.5%	3.62	3.63	—
2019	23	A RAW	Asheville Tourists	40	8	97	430	80	41	2	20%	2.4	18.6%	9.5%	9.1%	0.5%	3.62	2.99	—
2021	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	39	2	59	253	59	26	4	5%	1.5	19.9%	10.9%	9.0%	1.6%	3.37	3.68	—
2021	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	39	2	59	253	59	26	4	5%	1.5	23.3%	10.3%	13.0%	1.6%	3.37	3.30	—
2022	26	MIX MLE	2 levels	60	0	74	317	76	29	10	0%	1.2	22.7%	9.3%	13.4%	2.9%	4.15	3.97	+0.5
2022	26	MIX RAW	2 levels	60	0	74	317	76	29	10	0%	1.2	24.0%	9.1%	14.8%	3.2%	4.15	3.98	+0.5
2023	27	MLB MLE	Colorado Rockies	70	3	89	381	77	27	6	4%	1.3	20.2%	7.1%	13.1%	1.4%	4.33	3.06	+1.6
2023	27	MLB RAW	Colorado Rockies	70	3	89	381	77	27	6	4%	1.3	20.2%	7.1%	13.1%	1.6%	4.33	3.16	+1.5
2024	28	MIX MLE	3 levels	50	1	55	259	52	31	9	2%	1.1	18.6%	11.9%	6.7%	2.9%	4.77	4.64	-0.1
2024	28	MIX MLE	3 levels	50	1	55	259	52	31	9	2%	1.1	18.6%	11.9%	6.7%	2.9%	4.77	4.64	-0.1
2024	28	MIX RAW	3 levels	50	1	55	259	52	31	9	2%	1.1	20.1%	12.0%	8.1%	3.5%	4.77	5.04	-0.3
2025	29	MIX MLE	2 levels	63	0	71	320	89	32	8	0%	1.1	26.8%	9.7%	17.1%	2.4%	5.70	3.36	+1.0
2025	29	MIX MLE	2 levels	63	0	71	320	89	32	8	0%	1.1	26.8%	9.7%	17.1%	2.4%	5.70	3.36	+1.0
2025	29	MIX RAW	2 levels	63	0	71	320	89	32	8	0%	1.1	27.8%	10.0%	17.8%	2.5%	5.70	3.41	+1.0
2026	30	MIX MLE	2 levels	60	0	55	233	60	18	8	0%	0.9	24.6%	7.5%	17.1%	3.5%	4.58	3.90	+0.4
2026	30	MIX MLE	2 levels	60	0	55	233	60	18	8	0%	0.9	24.6%	7.5%	17.1%	3.5%	4.58	3.90	+0.4
2026	30	MIX RAW	2 levels	60	0	55	233	60	18	8	0%	0.9	25.8%	7.7%	18.0%	3.4%	4.58	3.79	+0.5
▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded)
MLB Career	—			235	3	271	1197	257	105	31	1%	1.2	21.5%	8.8%	12.7%	2.6%	4.85	3.85	+2.2
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	31	MLB	WSH	41	0	43	182	44	17	6	0%	1.0	24.4%	9.2%	15.2%	3.1%	4.42	4.28	+0.1
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	32	MLB MLE	WSH	32	0	34	142	34	14	5	0%	1.1	23.6%	9.6%	14.0%	3.3%	4.49	4.54	+0.0
2029	33	MLB MLE	WSH	23	0	24	102	23	10	4	0%	1.1	22.8%	10.1%	12.7%	3.6%	4.69	4.82	-0.1
2028	32	MLB CTX	WSH	30	0	32	135	32	13	5	0%	1.1	23.6%	9.6%	14.0%	3.3%	4.49	4.54	+0.0
2029	33	MLB CTX	WSH	22	0	23	97	22	10	4	0%	1.0	22.8%	10.1%	12.7%	3.6%	4.69	4.82	-0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		287	3	326	1429	311	128	39	1%	1.1	21.8%	8.9%	12.8%	2.7%	4.80	3.89	+2.5
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		176	2	200	877	191	79	24	1%	1.1	21.8%	8.9%	12.8%	2.7%	4.80	3.89	+1.6
Career	—	MLE		399	14	526	2308	470	227	47	4%	1.3	20.4%	9.8%	10.5%	2.0%	4.28	3.74	+2.2
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		152	5	200	878	179	86	18	4%	1.3	20.4%	9.8%	10.5%	2.0%	4.28	3.74	+1.3

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.

2026 AAARochester Red Wings · 16 IPFIP 3.31 → 3.75 (+0.44)K% 31.1% → 26.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	31.15%	—	×0.860	26.79%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.20%	—	×0.900	7.38%
HR / BF /BF	3.28%	÷1.000	×1.100	3.61%

Factors used: pitcher AAA level factors (Triple-A 2023+ robo-zone set: walks improve on promotion) — K ×0.86, BB ×0.90, 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 100).

Result: FIP 3.31 → 3.75, 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).

2025 AAAScranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders · 16 IPFIP 3.10 → 3.31 (+0.21)K% 31.9% → 27.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	31.94%	—	×0.860	27.47%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	15.28%	—	×0.900	13.75%
HR / BF /BF	1.39%	÷1.070	×1.100	1.43%

Result: FIP 3.10 → 3.31, 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).

2024 AAAAlbuquerque Isotopes · 14 IPFIP 4.43 → 4.63 (+0.20)K% 27.1% → 23.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	27.14%	—	×0.860	23.34%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.00%	—	×0.900	9.00%
HR / BF /BF	4.29%	÷1.096	×1.100	4.30%

Result: FIP 4.43 → 4.63, 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).

2022 AAAAlbuquerque Isotopes · 26 IPFIP 3.02 → 3.46 (+0.44)K% 32.1% → 28.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	32.08%	—	×0.880	28.23%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.49%	—	×1.050	8.92%
HR / BF /BF	2.83%	÷1.061	×1.100	2.93%

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 112).

Result: FIP 3.02 → 3.46, 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).

2021 AAAAlbuquerque Isotopes · 38 IPFIP 3.73 → 3.96 (+0.24)K% 22.2% → 19.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	22.22%	—	×0.880	19.56%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.73%	—	×1.050	12.31%
HR / BF /BF	1.85%	÷1.172	×1.100	1.74%

Result: FIP 3.73 → 3.96, 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).

2021 AAHartford Yard Goats · 20 IPFIP 2.54 → 3.17 (+0.63)K% 25.3% → 20.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.27%	—	×0.810	20.47%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.69%	—	×1.100	8.46%
HR / BF /BF	1.10%	÷0.990	×1.200	1.33%

Factors used: pitcher AA level factors — K ×0.81, BB ×1.10, HR ×1.20. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 98).

Result: FIP 2.54 → 3.17, 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).

2019 AAsheville Tourists · 97 IPFIP 2.99 → 3.63 (+0.64)K% 18.6% → 13.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	18.60%	—	×0.740	13.77%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.53%	—	×1.180	11.25%
HR / BF /BF	0.47%	÷1.249	×1.300	0.48%

Factors used: pitcher A level factors — K ×0.74, BB ×1.18, HR ×1.30. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 150).

Result: FIP 2.99 → 3.63, 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).

2018 ROKGrand Junction Rockies · 27 IPFIP 3.17 → 4.59 (+1.42)K% 26.1% → 17.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	26.09%	—	×0.680	17.74%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.43%	—	×1.250	13.04%
HR / BF /BF	1.74%	÷1.000	×1.400	2.43%

Factors used: pitcher ROK level factors — K ×0.68, BB ×1.25, HR ×1.40. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 100).

Result: FIP 3.17 → 4.59, 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).

Career Path Comps

What happened to similar pitchers from this age · Y-axis: ERA+ (100 = league avg, 150 = elite, 80 = below) · Bands: P10–P90 outer, P25–P75 inner · Gold: OGILVIE projection

			Profile at Match Age					Next 3 Yrs				Career
Comp	Age	Role	FIP	K%	BB%	HR/BF	BABIP	FIP	K%	K-BB%	IP	ΔFIP	Low FIP	IP	Match
Jake Bird (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.28	24.4%	9.2%	3.1%	—	4.66	23.3%	13.4%	58	+0.38	—	—	—
Chris Hatcher R 2016 · 4.61 FIP	31	SU	4.61	23.8%	9.4%	4.2%	.283	4.69	22.0%	13.8%	96	+0.08	2.51	246	82
Joe Nelson R 2006 · 3.91 FIP	31	SU	3.91	22.8%	10.4%	2.6%	.258	4.05	23.4%	12.8%	94	+0.14	3.08	139	81
Mike Broadway R 2018 · 4.65 FIP	31	SU	4.65	23.0%	10.6%	3.9%	.282	—	—	—	—	—	1.74	195	79
Hirokazu Sawamura R 2021 · 4.48 FIP	33	SU	4.48	26.2%	11.2%	4.0%	.263	4.02	18.1%	6.8%	51	-0.46	4.02	104	78
Jeff Fulchino R 2011 · 4.44 FIP	31	SU	4.44	20.4%	11.1%	3.0%	.302	—	—	—	—	—	3.36	178	78
Fernando Rodriguez Jr. R 2015 · 3.34 FIP	31	SU	3.34	26.5%	9.6%	2.3%	.241	3.89	23.3%	13.2%	105	+0.55	3.34	335	77
Manny Acosta R 2012 · 4.49 FIP	31	SU	4.49	21.3%	11.1%	3.2%	.295	—	—	—	—	—	3.08	350	77
Ryan Brasier R 2019 · 4.12 FIP	31	SU	4.12	25.3%	8.3%	3.8%	.278	3.56	24.3%	18.2%	99	-0.56	2.31	426	76
Jim Miller R 2012 · 4.56 FIP	30	SU	4.56	20.9%	11.8%	3.1%	.243	3.95	18.8%	14.7%	74	-0.61	3.95	140	75
Brian Sanches R 2010 · 4.24 FIP	31	SU	4.24	21.3%	10.6%	2.9%	.217	4.35	19.6%	8.5%	62	+0.11	3.39	229	75
Mark Serrano R 2017 · 3.56 FIP	31	SU	3.56	21.9%	6.4%	2.7%	.240	5.25	20.2%	12.3%	42	+1.69	3.16	120	75
Jose Veras R 2012 · 3.39 FIP	31	SU	3.39	26.3%	13.0%	1.6%	.316	3.90	22.7%	12.7%	128	+0.51	3.37	422	74
Aquilino López R 2005 · 3.10 FIP	30	SU	3.10	30.6%	8.3%	2.8%	.333	3.89	16.2%	10.5%	96	+0.79	3.10	207	74
Justin Miller R 2018 · 4.24 FIP	31	SU	4.24	27.9%	7.4%	4.7%	.248	4.82	24.8%	18.8%	66	+0.58	2.63	292	73
Kazuhiro Sasaki R 2000 · 3.93 FIP	32	SU	3.93	29.4%	9.8%	3.8%	.212	2.88	24.9%	19.3%	161	-1.05	2.76	223	73
Brian Schlitter R 2016 · 3.28 FIP	30	SU	3.28	20.6%	10.8%	1.0%	.333	3.81	14.4%	6.6%	110	+0.53	3.27	300	73
Brad Brach R 2017 · 3.36 FIP	31	SU	3.36	25.5%	9.1%	2.3%	.254	3.68	22.8%	11.1%	129	+0.32	2.69	570	73
Jon Edwards R 2019 · 4.43 FIP	31	SU	4.43	25.1%	11.6%	3.6%	.290	—	—	—	—	—	2.40	132	73
James Hoyt R 2018 · 3.36 FIP	31	SU	3.36	24.4%	8.3%	2.3%	.269	4.63	22.1%	11.3%	92	+1.27	1.61	312	73
Andrew Robinson R 2017 · 4.32 FIP	29	SU	4.32	23.4%	8.8%	3.8%	.245	—	—	—	—	—	3.19	160	73

Career Comps

Completed MLB careers (no pro action in 2+ yrs) whose totals — actual + projected — most resemble this player's. Pool: 1,234 reliever careers (754 from 1990-2025 + 480 historical, 1901-2023), also matched on career-to-date at the same age. * Historical (Lahman) careers: rates era-adjusted to 2001-24 league levels; WAR is an OGILVIE proxy.

Player	162s	IP/yr	K%	BB%	HR/9	ERA
OGILVIE CAREER PROJECTION	1.9	47	22.1%	9.5%	1.08	4.76
Scott Service ('04)	2.1	46	22.2%	9.9%	1.23	5.04
Kevin Quackenbush ('21)	1.0	52	21.0%	9.2%	1.04	4.41
Yency Almonte ('24)	1.1	45	22.5%	9.9%	1.13	4.44
Bob Allen ('61-'67, -1 WAR*)	1.4	55	21.4%*	10.4%*	0.89*	4.79*
Bill Pleis ('61-'66, -0 WAR*)	1.4	56	19.7%*	9.8%*	1.15*	4.53*
Tom Dukes ('67-'72, -2 WAR*)	1.1	43	22.7%*	8.7%*	1.16*	5.37*