Mitch White

P Nashville Sounds

Age 32 RHP 6'3" / 210 lbs AAA peak 0.1 · 2027

Overview

AAARP

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2022	27	MIX2 levels	28	21	116	5.29	3.71	18.5%	7.6%	2.3	K 18.1% · BB 7.6% · FIP 3.76
2023	28	MIX3 levels	28	13	72	5.53	4.36	25.2%	11.4%	0.2	K 22.7% · BB 10.9% · FIP 4.83
2024	29	MIX2 levels	31	7	81	4.98	3.28	22.5%	9.2%	1.2	K 19.9% · BB 8.6% · FIP 3.46
2025	30	No MLB games played
2026	31	No MLB games played
2027PROJ	32	MLBMIL	1	1	6	4.55	4.55	20.6%	9.7%	0.1
2028PROJ37% MLB	33	MLBMIL	3	3	16	4.71	4.82	19.8%	10.1%	0.1
2029PROJ32% MLB	34	MLBMIL	2	2	11	4.96	5.13	18.9%	10.6%	0.0

Last 3 seasons WAR 3.7 · Next 3 projected WAR 0.2Projected rows: MLB playing time only, park and league context applied.

Contract

No contract data on file.

Skills · percentileStatcast 2024

FB Velo44

K%10

xwOBA vs10

CompsElian Leyva (age 30) · Mitch Lively (age 31) · Marco Quevedo (age 32)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 120112vR 103

ERA4.55

FIP4.55

K%20.6%

BB%9.7%

K-BB%11.0%

Proj IP60

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 60 IP

Grades · Statcast · Contract

Scouting Grades

STUF4040

CTRL4545

CMD4040

K†5050

Statcast Percentiles

FB Velo

p4494.1

Whiff%

p1016.0%

p1011.8%

xwOBA vs

p100.384

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	21	MIX MLE	3 levels	11	6	22	80	30	6	0	55%	2.0	25.5%	12.2%	13.3%	0.0%	0.00	2.49	—
2016	21	MIX RAW	3 levels	11	6	22	80	30	6	0	55%	2.0	37.5%	7.5%	30.0%	0.0%	0.00	1.19	—
2017	22	MIX MLE	3 levels	19	19	74	301	88	31	2	100%	3.9	22.8%	11.8%	10.9%	0.7%	2.93	3.05	—
2017	22	MIX RAW	3 levels	19	19	74	301	88	31	2	100%	3.9	29.2%	10.3%	18.9%	0.7%	2.93	2.33	—
2018	23	AA MLE	Tulsa Drillers	22	22	105	460	88	34	12	100%	4.8	15.5%	8.1%	7.4%	2.7%	4.53	4.32	—
2018	23	AA RAW	Tulsa Drillers	22	22	105	460	88	34	12	100%	4.8	19.1%	7.4%	11.7%	2.6%	4.53	3.88	—
2019	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	23	20	94	395	105	31	16	87%	4.1	22.7%	8.3%	14.4%	4.4%	5.09	4.64	—
2019	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	23	20	94	395	105	31	16	87%	4.1	26.6%	7.8%	18.7%	4.1%	5.09	4.07	—
2020	25	MLB MLE	Los Angeles Dodgers	2	0	3	11	2	1	0	0%	1.5	18.2%	9.1%	9.1%	0.0%	0.00	2.72	+0.1
2020	25	MLB RAW	Los Angeles Dodgers	2	0	3	11	2	1	0	0%	1.5	18.2%	9.1%	9.1%	0.0%	0.00	2.77	+0.1
2021	26	MIX MLE	3 levels	33	13	90	373	102	29	8	39%	2.7	25.1%	8.6%	16.5%	2.1%	2.69	3.20	+1.5
2021	26	MIX RAW	3 levels	33	13	90	373	102	29	8	39%	2.7	27.3%	7.8%	19.6%	2.1%	2.69	2.96	+1.8
2022	27	MIX MLE	2 levels	28	21	116	503	93	38	11	75%	4.1	18.1%	7.6%	10.5%	2.2%	5.29	3.76	+2.3
2022	27	MIX RAW	2 levels	28	21	116	503	93	38	11	75%	4.1	18.5%	7.6%	10.9%	2.2%	5.29	3.71	+2.3
2023	28	MIX MLE	3 levels	28	13	72	325	82	37	11	46%	2.6	22.7%	10.9%	11.8%	4.1%	5.53	4.83	-0.2
2023	28	MIX RAW	3 levels	28	13	72	325	82	37	11	46%	2.6	25.2%	11.4%	13.8%	3.4%	5.53	4.36	+0.2
2024	29	MIX MLE	2 levels	31	7	81	360	81	33	6	23%	2.6	19.9%	8.6%	11.3%	1.7%	4.98	3.46	+1.1
2024	29	MIX MLE	2 levels	31	7	81	360	81	33	6	23%	2.6	19.9%	8.6%	11.3%	1.7%	4.98	3.46	+1.1
2024	29	MIX RAW	2 levels	31	7	81	360	81	33	6	23%	2.6	22.5%	9.2%	13.3%	1.7%	4.98	3.28	+1.2
▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded)
MLB Career	—			71	22	185	818	155	70	21	31%	2.6	18.9%	8.6%	10.4%	2.6%	5.25	4.04	+1.1
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	32	MLB	MIL	1	1	6	25	5	2	1	100%	6.0	20.6%	9.7%	11.0%	2.9%	4.55	4.55	+0.1
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	33	MLB MLE	MIL	7	7	44	186	37	19	6	100%	6.3	19.8%	10.1%	9.7%	3.2%	4.71	4.82	+0.3
2029	34	MLB MLE	MIL	6	6	34	144	27	15	5	100%	5.7	18.9%	10.6%	8.3%	3.5%	4.96	5.13	+0.1
2028	33	MLB CTX	MIL	3	3	16	68	13	7	2	100%	5.3	19.8%	10.1%	9.7%	3.2%	4.71	4.82	+0.1
2029	34	MLB CTX	MIL	2	2	11	46	9	5	2	100%	5.5	18.9%	10.6%	8.3%	3.5%	4.96	5.13	+0.0
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		76	27	212	933	177	82	25	36%	2.8	19.0%	8.8%	10.2%	2.7%	5.20	4.06	+1.2
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		71	25	200	879	167	77	24	35%	2.8	19.0%	8.8%	10.2%	2.7%	5.20	4.06	+1.2
Career	—	MLE		197	121	657	2808	582	253	70	61%	3.3	20.7%	9.0%	11.7%	2.5%	4.30	3.87	+3.4
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		60	37	200	855	177	77	21	61%	3.3	20.7%	9.0%	11.7%	2.5%	4.30	3.87	+2.6

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.

2024 AAANashville Sounds · 58 IPFIP 2.36 → 2.66 (+0.30)K% 27.2% → 23.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	27.20%	—	×0.860	23.39%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.80%	—	×0.900	7.92%
HR / BF /BF	0.80%	÷0.909	×1.100	0.97%

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 82).

Result: FIP 2.36 → 2.66, 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 AAABuffalo Bisons · 56 IPFIP 4.33 → 4.89 (+0.56)K% 26.7% → 23.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	26.69%	—	×0.860	22.96%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	11.95%	—	×0.900	10.76%
HR / BF /BF	3.59%	÷0.916	×1.100	4.30%

Result: FIP 4.33 → 4.89, 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 AAABuffalo Bisons · 17 IPFIP 3.44 → 3.98 (+0.54)K% 23.8% → 21.0%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	23.81%	—	×0.880	20.95%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.76%	—	×1.050	5.00%
HR / BF /BF	3.17%	÷0.951	×1.100	3.67%

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 90).

Result: FIP 3.44 → 3.98, 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 AAAOklahoma City Dodgers · 32 IPFIP 2.19 → 2.58 (+0.38)K% 28.9% → 25.4%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	28.89%	—	×0.880	25.42%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.89%	—	×1.050	9.33%
HR / BF /BF	0.74%	÷1.016	×1.100	0.80%

Result: FIP 2.19 → 2.58, 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).

2021 ARancho Cucamonga Quakes · 12 IPFIP 1.86 → 3.14 (+1.27)K% 34.1% → 25.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	34.15%	—	×0.740	25.27%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	2.44%	—	×1.180	2.88%
HR / BF /BF	2.44%	÷0.965	×1.300	3.29%

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 93).

Result: FIP 1.86 → 3.14, 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 AAAOklahoma City Dodgers · 64 IPFIP 4.69 → 5.06 (+0.37)K% 24.5% → 21.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	24.46%	—	×0.880	21.53%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.63%	—	×1.050	9.06%
HR / BF /BF	4.68%	÷1.073	×1.100	4.79%

Result: FIP 4.69 → 5.06, 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 AATulsa Drillers · 30 IPFIP 2.59 → 3.63 (+1.03)K% 31.6% → 25.6%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	31.62%	—	×0.810	25.62%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	5.98%	—	×1.100	6.58%
HR / BF /BF	2.56%	÷0.909	×1.200	3.38%

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 2.59 → 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 AATulsa Drillers · 105 IPFIP 3.85 → 4.32 (+0.47)K% 19.1% → 15.5%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.13%	—	×0.810	15.50%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	7.39%	—	×1.100	8.13%
HR / BF /BF	2.61%	÷1.147	×1.200	2.73%

Result: FIP 3.85 → 4.32, 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).

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
Mitch White (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.55	20.6%	9.7%	2.9%	—	4.96	19.4%	9.0%	78	+0.41	—	—	—
Elian Leyva R 2019 · 4.30 FIP	30	SP-	4.30	17.0%	8.5%	2.9%	.323	—	—	—	—	—	3.10	158	80
Mitch Lively R 2017 · 3.47 FIP	31	SP-	3.47	17.0%	6.4%	1.8%	.304	—	—	—	—	—	2.39	158	73
Marco Quevedo R 2019 · 5.17 FIP	32	SP-	5.17	13.6%	11.4%	3.2%	.344	—	—	—	—	—	4.13	300	71
Mike Burns R 2009 · 4.90 FIP	31	SP-	4.90	17.2%	6.6%	4.4%	.307	—	—	—	—	—	3.10	104	68
Zack Segovia R 2015 · 4.78 FIP	32	SP	4.78	15.0%	8.3%	3.4%	.314	3.33	20.2%	14.3%	39	-1.45	3.33	144	67
Jared Fernandez R 2003 · 3.57 FIP	31	SP-	3.57	11.8%	6.2%	1.2%	.269	—	—	—	—	—	3.57	101	66
Reinier Roibal R 2019 · 4.91 FIP	30	SP	4.91	17.5%	11.8%	3.3%	.426	—	—	—	—	—	3.11	133	63
Yohan Pino R 2015 · 4.13 FIP	31	SP-	4.13	17.8%	5.8%	3.3%	.312	5.33	15.2%	11.6%	35	+1.20	3.84	193	62
Juan Omar Espinoza R 2016 · 4.84 FIP	32	SP-	4.84	8.4%	9.2%	2.4%	.348	—	—	—	—	—	4.81	104	62
Todd Redmond R 2015 · 3.86 FIP	30	SW	3.86	15.4%	7.1%	2.1%	.311	—	—	—	—	—	3.21	247	62
Hector Galvan R 2019 · 4.84 FIP	31	SP-	4.84	14.3%	12.2%	2.6%	.357	—	—	—	—	—	3.59	406	61
Danny Gutierrez R 2017 · 4.11 FIP	30	SP	4.11	15.1%	6.1%	2.8%	.362	—	—	—	—	—	3.34	239	61
Osvaldo Fernandez R 2001 · 4.53 FIP	32	SP-	4.53	9.6%	8.2%	2.2%	.324	—	—	—	—	—	4.25	387	60
Jason Berken R 2016 · 4.54 FIP	32	SW	4.54	11.5%	8.3%	2.5%	.308	—	—	—	—	—	3.37	468	60
Jesus Adrian Castillo R 2016 · 3.88 FIP	32	SP	3.88	12.8%	6.0%	2.0%	.245	4.27	13.6%	7.2%	58	+0.39	2.23	173	59
Miguel Ruiz R 2017 · 5.60 FIP	31	SP	5.60	10.6%	11.0%	3.6%	.279	—	—	—	—	—	5.60	117	58
Brandon Beachy R 2019 · 4.19 FIP	32	SP	4.19	17.4%	9.5%	2.5%	.315	—	—	—	—	—	1.97	364	58
Thad Weber R 2017 · 5.25 FIP	32	SP-	5.25	13.2%	4.4%	4.9%	.398	—	—	—	—	—	4.40	378	57
Andres Ivan Meza R 2019 · 4.33 FIP	32	SP	4.33	11.7%	7.7%	2.3%	.349	—	—	—	—	—	4.14	275	56
Junior Guerra R 2017 · 5.24 FIP	32	SP-	5.24	19.4%	12.8%	3.9%	.255	3.99	22.2%	12.5%	248	-1.25	3.18	646	56

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	1.6	54	19.4%	9.4%	1.08	5.02
Will Cunnane ('04)	1.4	46	18.9%	10.4%	1.25	5.26
Dennis Powell ('85-'93, -2 WAR*)	1.7	49	17.6%*	10.1%*	1.18*	5.31*
Bill Pleis ('61-'66, -0 WAR*)	1.4	56	19.7%*	9.8%*	1.15*	4.53*
John Morris ('66-'74, -0 WAR*)	1.2	58	18.3%*	8.2%*	1.00*	4.74*
Drew VerHagen ('23)	1.4	47	19.1%	9.4%	1.37	4.98
Josias Manzanillo ('04)	1.7	57	20.0%	10.2%	1.21	4.71