Joey Wentz

P Atlanta Braves

Age 29 LHP 6'5" / 220 lbs MLB peak 0.1 · 2027 ILInjured 60-Day (D60)

Overview

MLBRPIL-6040-MAN

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2023	25	MIX2 levels	31	25	134	6.36	5.12	21.8%	9.5%	0.4	K 20.9% · BB 9.3% · FIP 5.15
2024	26	MLBPIT	46	0	67	4.68	3.90	24.0%	10.5%	0.5
2025	27	MLBATL	39	13	98	5.60	3.91	20.8%	9.0%	0.7
2026	28	No MLB games played
2027PROJ	29	MLBATL	9	9	54	4.51	4.43	21.6%	9.4%	0.6
2028PROJ95% MLB	30	MLBATL	8	8	50	4.59	4.64	20.9%	9.7%	0.4
2029PROJ95% MLB	31	MLBATL	7	7	41	4.60	4.60	22.1%	9.2%	0.4

Last 3 seasons WAR 1.7 · Next 3 projected WAR 1.4Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Skills · percentileStatcast 2025

K%41

xwOBA vs35

FB Velo34

CompsDanny Wirchansky (age 27) · Roy Merritt (age 30) · Scott Downs (age 29)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 101109vR 117

ERA4.51

FIP4.43

K%21.6%

BB%9.4%

K-BB%12.2%

Proj IP54

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 54 IP

Statcast · Contract

Statcast Percentiles

FB Velo

p3493.4

Whiff%

p3723.5%

p4120.8%

xwOBA vs

p350.329

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)
2016	18	ROK MLE	Danville Braves	12	12	44	185	53	25	0	100%	3.7	19.5%	16.9%	2.6%	0.0%	3.68	3.59	—
2016	18	ROK RAW	Danville Braves	12	12	44	185	53	25	0	100%	3.7	28.6%	13.5%	15.1%	0.0%	3.68	2.40	—
2017	19	A MLE	Rome Braves	26	26	132	527	152	46	4	100%	5.1	21.3%	10.3%	11.0%	1.3%	2.60	3.32	—
2017	19	A RAW	Rome Braves	26	26	132	527	152	46	4	100%	5.1	28.8%	8.7%	20.1%	0.8%	2.60	2.23	—
2018	20	A+ MLE	Florida Fire Frogs	16	16	67	266	53	24	3	100%	4.2	15.3%	10.4%	5.0%	1.4%	2.28	3.91	—
2018	20	A+ RAW	Florida Fire Frogs	16	16	67	266	53	24	3	100%	4.2	19.9%	9.0%	10.9%	1.1%	2.28	3.17	—
2019	21	AA MLE	Erie SeaWolves	25	25	129	534	137	48	16	100%	5.1	20.8%	9.9%	10.9%	2.8%	4.20	4.12	—
2019	21	AA RAW	Erie SeaWolves	25	25	129	534	137	48	16	100%	5.1	25.7%	9.0%	16.7%	3.0%	4.20	3.71	—
2021	23	MIX MLE	2 levels	18	18	72	317	82	41	12	100%	4.0	20.4%	14.4%	6.0%	4.7%	4.50	5.78	—
2021	23	MIX RAW	2 levels	18	18	72	317	82	41	12	100%	4.0	25.9%	12.9%	12.9%	3.8%	4.50	4.70	—
2022	24	MIX MLE	3 levels	21	20	86	350	84	35	8	95%	4.1	22.2%	10.3%	12.0%	2.6%	3.03	3.94	+1.5
2022	24	MIX RAW	3 levels	21	20	86	350	84	35	8	95%	4.1	24.0%	10.0%	14.0%	2.3%	3.03	3.58	+1.9
2023	25	MIX MLE	2 levels	31	25	134	620	135	59	28	81%	4.3	20.9%	9.3%	11.6%	4.8%	6.36	5.15	+0.4
2023	25	MIX RAW	2 levels	31	25	134	620	135	59	28	81%	4.3	21.8%	9.5%	12.3%	4.5%	6.36	5.12	+0.4
2024	26	MLB MLE	Pittsburgh Pirates	46	0	67	304	73	32	8	0%	1.5	24.0%	10.5%	13.5%	2.8%	4.68	3.97	+0.5
2024	26	MLB MLE	Pittsburgh Pirates	46	0	67	304	73	32	8	0%	1.5	24.0%	10.5%	13.5%	2.8%	4.68	3.97	+0.5
2024	26	MLB RAW	Pittsburgh Pirates	46	0	67	304	73	32	8	0%	1.5	24.0%	10.5%	13.5%	2.6%	4.68	3.90	+0.5
2025	27	MLB MLE	Atlanta Braves	39	13	98	442	92	40	11	33%	2.5	20.8%	9.0%	11.8%	2.5%	5.60	3.85	+0.8
2025	27	MLB MLE	Atlanta Braves	39	13	98	442	92	40	11	33%	2.5	20.8%	9.0%	11.8%	2.5%	5.60	3.85	+0.8
2025	27	MLB RAW	Atlanta Braves	39	13	98	442	92	40	11	33%	2.5	20.8%	9.0%	11.8%	2.5%	5.60	3.91	+0.7
▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded)
MLB Career	—			117	39	304	1373	290	132	46	33%	2.6	21.1%	9.6%	11.5%	3.4%	5.57	4.46	+0.3
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	29	MLB	ATL	9	9	54	228	49	21	7	100%	6.0	21.6%	9.4%	12.2%	2.9%	4.51	4.43	+0.6
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	30	MLB MLE	ATL	9	9	53	223	47	22	7	100%	5.9	20.9%	9.7%	11.2%	3.1%	4.59	4.64	+0.5
2029	31	MLB MLE	ATL	7	7	43	182	40	17	6	100%	6.1	22.1%	9.2%	12.9%	3.3%	4.60	4.60	+0.4
2028	30	MLB CTX	ATL	8	8	50	211	44	20	7	100%	6.2	20.9%	9.7%	11.2%	3.1%	4.59	4.64	+0.4
2029	31	MLB CTX	ATL	7	7	41	173	38	16	6	100%	5.9	22.1%	9.2%	12.9%	3.3%	4.60	4.60	+0.4
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		132	54	395	1757	372	168	58	41%	3.0	21.2%	9.6%	11.6%	3.3%	5.35	4.34	+1.0
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		67	27	200	890	189	85	29	41%	3.0	21.2%	9.6%	11.6%	3.3%	5.35	4.34	+0.5
Career	—	MLE		234	155	829	3545	738	377	99	66%	3.5	20.8%	10.6%	10.2%	2.8%	4.22	4.22	+4.2
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		56	37	200	855	178	91	24	66%	3.5	20.8%	10.6%	10.2%	2.8%	4.22	4.22	+2.1

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.

2023 AAAToledo Mud Hens · 29 IPFIP 3.13 → 3.64 (+0.51)K% 28.9% → 24.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.91%	—	×0.860	24.86%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.38%	—	×0.900	8.44%
HR / BF /BF	2.34%	÷0.901	×1.100	2.86%

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 80).

Result: FIP 3.13 → 3.64, 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 AAAToledo Mud Hens · 48 IPFIP 3.79 → 4.25 (+0.46)K% 27.0% → 23.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	27.04%	—	×0.880	23.80%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	10.20%	—	×1.050	10.71%
HR / BF /BF	3.06%	÷1.026	×1.100	3.28%

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 105).

Result: FIP 3.79 → 4.25, 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 AAErie SeaWolves · 53 IPFIP 4.44 → 5.25 (+0.81)K% 24.9% → 20.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.89%	—	×0.810	20.16%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	14.16%	—	×1.100	15.58%
HR / BF /BF	3.00%	÷1.055	×1.200	3.42%

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 111).

Result: FIP 4.44 → 5.25, 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 ALakeland Flying Tigers · 19 IPFIP 5.16 → 7.27 (+2.11)K% 28.6% → 21.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.57%	—	×0.740	21.14%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.52%	—	×1.180	11.24%
HR / BF /BF	5.95%	÷0.937	×1.300	8.26%

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 87).

Result: FIP 5.16 → 7.27, 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 AAErie SeaWolves · 129 IPFIP 3.72 → 4.12 (+0.41)K% 25.7% → 20.8%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	25.66%	—	×0.810	20.78%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.99%	—	×1.100	9.89%
HR / BF /BF	3.00%	÷1.294	×1.200	2.78%

Result: FIP 3.72 → 4.12, 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 A+Florida Fire Frogs · 67 IPFIP 3.18 → 3.91 (+0.73)K% 19.9% → 15.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.92%	—	×0.770	15.34%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.02%	—	×1.150	10.38%
HR / BF /BF	1.13%	÷0.974	×1.250	1.45%

Factors used: pitcher A+ level factors — K ×0.77, BB ×1.15, HR ×1.25. Pitcher translation is level-wide (no per-league rows, no age adjustment); HR/BF is park-adjusted at half strength (park HR factor 95).

Result: FIP 3.18 → 3.91, 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).

2017 ARome Braves · 132 IPFIP 2.19 → 3.32 (+1.13)K% 28.8% → 21.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.84%	—	×0.740	21.34%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.73%	—	×1.180	10.30%
HR / BF /BF	0.76%	÷0.753	×1.300	1.31%

Result: FIP 2.19 → 3.32, 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 ROKDanville Braves · 44 IPFIP 2.39 → 3.59 (+1.20)K% 28.6% → 19.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.65%	—	×0.680	19.48%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	13.51%	—	×1.250	16.89%
HR / BF /BF	0.00%	÷1.000	×1.400	0.00%

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 2.39 → 3.59, 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
Joey Wentz (OGILVIE)	—	—	—	—	—	2.9%	—	4.62	21.4%	11.9%	96	+0.19	—	—	—
Danny Wirchansky L 2024 · 4.47 FIP	27	SP-	4.47	16.2%	7.4%	3.3%	.246	5.88	13.0%	0.2%	68	+1.41	4.47	179	68
Roy Merritt L 2016 · 3.93 FIP	30	SP-	3.93	13.3%	5.9%	2.2%	.293	3.95	16.2%	10.4%	116	+0.02	3.93	129	63
Scott Downs L 2005 · 4.22 FIP	29	SP-	4.22	18.4%	8.4%	2.9%	.283	3.29	20.5%	12.9%	206	-0.93	2.68	748	63
Brad Mills L 2014 · 5.61 FIP	29	SP-	5.61	18.8%	10.9%	5.0%	.364	5.00	14.5%	4.0%	182	-0.61	4.22	243	63
Mike Montgomery L 2018 · 3.64 FIP	29	SP-	3.64	16.1%	6.6%	1.9%	.300	5.22	17.4%	8.6%	108	+1.58	3.43	764	62
Chris O'Grady L 2017 · 4.33 FIP	27	SP-	4.33	21.4%	9.0%	3.5%	.280	—	—	—	—	—	3.50	232	62
John Bale L 2003 · 4.12 FIP	29	SP	4.12	19.0%	5.1%	3.6%	.305	—	—	—	—	—	2.49	168	62
John Lamb L 2018 · 4.64 FIP	28	SP	4.64	22.5%	7.2%	4.6%	.319	—	—	—	—	—	3.38	390	62
John Anderson L 2016 · 4.23 FIP	27	SP-	4.23	14.3%	8.7%	2.2%	.367	—	—	—	—	—	4.12	235	61
Onelki Garcia L 2017 · 4.02 FIP	27	SP-	4.02	16.5%	9.3%	2.1%	.328	—	—	—	—	—	2.99	164	61
Jack Snodgrass L 2016 · 5.01 FIP	28	SP-	5.01	15.7%	10.1%	3.6%	.305	—	—	—	—	—	4.66	118	61
Andy Otero L 2021 · 3.89 FIP	29	SP-	3.89	24.7%	6.2%	3.8%	.298	4.36	14.5%	5.6%	68	+0.47	2.86	200	60
Brian Burres L 2010 · 4.58 FIP	29	SP-	4.58	12.4%	8.3%	2.7%	.281	6.49	16.7%	10.0%	14	+1.91	4.50	344	59
Aríel Miranda L 2018 · 4.21 FIP	29	SP	4.21	17.9%	12.8%	1.8%	.315	—	—	—	—	—	3.46	431	59
Matt Lujan L 2017 · 4.69 FIP	28	SP-	4.69	14.3%	6.4%	3.6%	.348	—	—	—	—	—	4.06	227	59
Tom Gorzelanny L 2011 · 3.94 FIP	29	SP-	3.94	21.3%	6.3%	3.4%	.282	3.69	22.2%	13.4%	178	-0.25	2.67	899	59
Kyle Hart L 2022 · 5.24 FIP	29	SW	5.24	17.4%	9.9%	4.3%	.286	4.29	18.4%	9.5%	196	-0.95	3.60	886	59
Kwang Hyun Kim L 2020 · 3.76 FIP	32	SP	3.76	15.6%	6.5%	2.1%	.214	4.21	17.7%	9.5%	107	+0.45	3.76	146	58
Marco Tovar L 2017 · 5.04 FIP	28	SP-	5.04	16.1%	11.3%	3.4%	.317	4.78	12.6%	7.0%	82	-0.26	3.78	327	58
James Gillheeney L 2015 · 3.79 FIP	27	SP-	3.79	14.4%	8.0%	1.6%	.300	—	—	—	—	—	3.79	129	58

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	2.3	66	21.2%	9.8%	1.26	5.23
Jorge López ('25)	2.8	70	19.8%	8.8%	1.36	5.31
Dennis Powell ('85-'93, -2 WAR*)	1.7	49	17.6%*	10.1%*	1.18*	5.31*
Will Cunnane ('04)	1.4	46	18.9%	10.4%	1.25	5.26
Phil Hennigan ('69-'73, -0 WAR*)	1.4	70	20.9%*	10.4%*	1.50*	4.95*
Steve Wilson ('88-'93, 0 WAR*)	1.7	69	21.6%*	8.8%*	1.25*	4.84*
Chris Stratton ('25)	3.1	69	21.0%	9.5%	1.02	4.64