Tanner Burns
P Columbus Clippers| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 26 | AAACLE | 24 | 0 | 35 | 5.86 | 4.60 | 17.7% | 12.0% | — | K 15.2% · BB 10.8% · FIP 4.58 |
| 2026 | 27 | AAACLE | 24 | 0 | 27 | 7.09 | 4.86 | 22.5% | 17.1% | — | K 19.3% · BB 15.3% · FIP 4.82 |
| 2027PROJ | 28 | MLBCLE | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5.14 | 5.14 | 18.8% | 12.9% | -0.0 | |
| 2028PROJ37% MLB | 29 | MLBCLE | 6 | 0 | 6 | 5.13 | 5.18 | 19.0% | 12.8% | -0.0 |
Grades · 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) | |||||||||||||||||||
| ▸ Model inputs — neutral MLE (past 3 seasons + 2027 so far) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2021 | 22 | A+ MLE | Lake County Captains | 18 | 18 | 76 | 315 | 91 | 29 | 10 | 100% | 4.2 | 22.2% | 10.6% | 11.7% | 3.2% | 3.57 | 4.34 | — |
| 2021 | 22 | A+ RAW | Lake County Captains | 18 | 18 | 76 | 315 | 91 | 29 | 10 | 100% | 4.2 | 28.9% | 9.2% | 19.7% | 3.2% | 3.57 | 3.56 | — |
| 2022 | 23 | AA MLE | Akron RubberDucks | 21 | 21 | 89 | 388 | 92 | 45 | 14 | 100% | 4.2 | 19.2% | 12.8% | 6.4% | 4.3% | 3.55 | 5.44 | — |
| 2022 | 23 | AA RAW | Akron RubberDucks | 21 | 21 | 89 | 388 | 92 | 45 | 14 | 100% | 4.2 | 23.7% | 11.6% | 12.1% | 3.6% | 3.55 | 4.60 | — |
| 2023 | 24 | AA MLE | Akron RubberDucks | 29 | 14 | 87 | 360 | 86 | 41 | 11 | 48% | 3.0 | 19.4% | 12.5% | 6.8% | 4.0% | 3.01 | 5.27 | — |
| 2023 | 24 | AA RAW | Akron RubberDucks | 29 | 14 | 87 | 360 | 86 | 41 | 11 | 48% | 3.0 | 23.9% | 11.4% | 12.5% | 3.1% | 3.01 | 4.18 | — |
| 2024 | 25 | AAA MLE | Columbus Clippers | 51 | 0 | 69 | 308 | 70 | 46 | 11 | 0% | 1.3 | 19.5% | 13.4% | 6.1% | 3.7% | 4.59 | 5.19 | — |
| 2024 | 25 | AAA MLE | Columbus Clippers | 51 | 0 | 69 | 308 | 70 | 46 | 11 | 0% | 1.3 | 19.5% | 13.4% | 6.1% | 3.7% | 4.59 | 5.19 | — |
| 2024 | 25 | AAA RAW | Columbus Clippers | 51 | 0 | 69 | 308 | 70 | 46 | 11 | 0% | 1.3 | 22.7% | 14.9% | 7.8% | 3.6% | 4.59 | 5.15 | — |
| 2025 | 26 | AAA MLE | Columbus Clippers | 24 | 0 | 35 | 158 | 28 | 19 | 4 | 0% | 1.5 | 15.2% | 10.8% | 4.4% | 2.5% | 5.86 | 4.58 | — |
| 2025 | 26 | AAA MLE | Columbus Clippers | 24 | 0 | 35 | 158 | 28 | 19 | 4 | 0% | 1.5 | 15.2% | 10.8% | 4.4% | 2.5% | 5.86 | 4.58 | — |
| 2025 | 26 | AAA RAW | Columbus Clippers | 24 | 0 | 35 | 158 | 28 | 19 | 4 | 0% | 1.5 | 17.7% | 12.0% | 5.7% | 2.5% | 5.86 | 4.60 | — |
| 2026 | 27 | AAA MLE | Columbus Clippers | 24 | 0 | 27 | 129 | 29 | 22 | 3 | 0% | 1.1 | 19.3% | 15.3% | 4.0% | 2.6% | 7.09 | 4.82 | — |
| 2026 | 27 | AAA MLE | Columbus Clippers | 24 | 0 | 27 | 129 | 29 | 22 | 3 | 0% | 1.1 | 19.3% | 15.3% | 4.0% | 2.6% | 7.09 | 4.82 | — |
| 2026 | 27 | AAA RAW | Columbus Clippers | 24 | 0 | 27 | 129 | 29 | 22 | 3 | 0% | 1.1 | 22.5% | 17.1% | 5.4% | 2.3% | 7.09 | 4.86 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 28 | MLB | CLE | 2 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.8% | 12.9% | 5.9% | 2.9% | 5.14 | 5.14 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 29 | MLB MLE | CLE | 15 | 0 | 16 | 66 | 13 | 8 | 2 | 0% | 1.0 | 19.0% | 12.8% | 6.2% | 3.1% | 5.13 | 5.18 | -0.1 |
| 2028 | 29 | MLB CTX | CLE | 6 | 0 | 6 | 25 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0% | 1.0 | 19.0% | 12.8% | 6.2% | 3.1% | 5.13 | 5.18 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 5 | 0 | 6 | 24 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0% | 1.1 | 19.0% | 12.8% | 6.2% | 3.1% | 5.13 | 4.80 | -0.0 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 190 | 0 | 200 | 844 | 174 | 105 | 35 | 0% | 1.1 | 19.0% | 12.8% | 6.2% | 3.1% | 5.13 | 4.80 | -0.6 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 167 | 53 | 382 | 1658 | 323 | 206 | 60 | 32% | 2.3 | 19.5% | 12.4% | 7.1% | 3.6% | 4.08 | 5.02 | -0.1 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 88 | 28 | 200 | 869 | 170 | 108 | 31 | 32% | 2.3 | 19.5% | 12.4% | 7.1% | 3.6% | 4.08 | 5.02 | -1.5 | |
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 AAAColumbus Clippers · 27 IPFIP 4.64 → 4.82 (+0.18)K% 22.5% → 19.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 22.48% | — | ×0.860 | 19.33% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 17.05% | — | ×0.900 | 15.35% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.33% | ÷1.000 | ×1.100 | 2.56% |
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 4.64 → 4.82, 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 AAAColumbus Clippers · 35 IPFIP 4.52 → 4.58 (+0.07)K% 17.7% → 15.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 17.72% | — | ×0.860 | 15.24% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 12.03% | — | ×0.900 | 10.82% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.53% | ÷1.093 | ×1.100 | 2.55% |
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 118).
Result: FIP 4.52 → 4.58, 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 AAAColumbus Clippers · 69 IPFIP 5.03 → 5.19 (+0.15)K% 22.7% → 19.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 22.73% | — | ×0.860 | 19.55% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 14.94% | — | ×0.900 | 13.44% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.57% | ÷1.060 | ×1.100 | 3.70% |
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 112).
Result: FIP 5.03 → 5.19, 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).
2023 AAAkron RubberDucks · 87 IPFIP 4.20 → 5.27 (+1.07)K% 23.9% → 19.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 23.89% | — | ×0.810 | 19.35% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 11.39% | — | ×1.100 | 12.53% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.06% | ÷0.909 | ×1.200 | 4.04% |
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 82).
Result: FIP 4.20 → 5.27, 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).
2022 AAAkron RubberDucks · 89 IPFIP 4.55 → 5.44 (+0.89)K% 23.7% → 19.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 23.71% | — | ×0.810 | 19.21% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 11.60% | — | ×1.100 | 12.76% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.61% | ÷1.014 | ×1.200 | 4.27% |
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 103).
Result: FIP 4.55 → 5.44, 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 A+Lake County Captains · 76 IPFIP 3.57 → 4.34 (+0.78)K% 28.9% → 22.2%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 28.89% | — | ×0.770 | 22.24% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.21% | — | ×1.150 | 10.59% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.17% | ÷1.222 | ×1.250 | 3.25% |
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 144).
Result: FIP 3.57 → 4.34, 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).