T.J. Sikkema

P Worcester Red Sox

Age 29 LHP 6'0" / 211 lbs AAA peak 0.5 · 2027

Overview

AAAPROSPECT

ETA2029MLB%10%

Year	Age	Lvl / Team	G	GS	IP	ERA	FIP	K%	BB%	WAR	MLE rates
2024	26	MIX2 levels	20	14	72	3.61	3.03	23.7%	5.3%	—	K 18.5% · BB 6.0% · FIP 3.57
2025	27	MIX2 levels	23	15	87	4.57	3.56	19.6%	8.4%	—	K 16.1% · BB 8.9% · FIP 4.10
2026	28	AAABOS	2	2	5	9.64	7.39	14.8%	18.5%	—	K 14.8% · BB 18.5% · FIP 6.23
2027PROJ	29	MLBBOS	1	1	7	4.81	4.81	15.7%	8.8%	0.0
2028PROJ37% MLB	30	MLBBOS	3	3	20	4.87	4.94	16.1%	9.2%	0.1
2029PROJ55% MLB	31	MLBBOS	4	4	26	4.99	5.10	16.2%	9.5%	0.1

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

Contract

No contract data on file.

Scouting grades · 20-80

Stuff40Control50Command45

Career WAR0.0 WAR median (P10 -0.4 / P90 0.0, comp-based) · star 0% · didn't stick 100%

CompsEnrique Lechuga (age 29) · Danny Wirchansky (age 27) · Kelvin Marte (age 29)

2027 FULL-SEASON PROJECTIONrates below = full-season projection

showingPROJ

wRC+ AGAINSTvL 108116vR 125

ERA4.81

FIP4.81

K%15.7%

BB%8.8%

K-BB%6.8%

Proj IP69

Value2027 · WAR

Runs saved vs league avg · 69 IP

Grades · Contract

Scouting Grades

STUF4040

CTRL5050

CMD4545

K†3040

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)
2022	24	MIX MLE	2 levels	19	18	69	297	83	24	9	95%	3.6	21.9%	9.0%	12.9%	3.9%	4.83	4.55	—
2022	24	MIX RAW	2 levels	19	18	69	297	83	24	9	95%	3.6	27.9%	8.1%	19.9%	3.0%	4.83	3.43	—
2023	25	AA MLE	Northwest Arkansas Naturals	34	0	72	316	63	38	11	0%	2.1	16.1%	13.2%	2.9%	4.8%	5.85	6.04	—
2023	25	AA RAW	Northwest Arkansas Naturals	34	0	72	316	63	38	11	0%	2.1	19.9%	12.0%	7.9%	3.5%	5.85	4.91	—
2024	26	MIX MLE	2 levels	20	14	72	304	72	16	7	70%	3.6	18.5%	6.0%	12.5%	2.3%	3.61	3.57	—
2024	26	MIX MLE	2 levels	20	14	72	304	72	16	7	70%	3.6	18.5%	6.0%	12.5%	2.3%	3.61	3.57	—
2024	26	MIX RAW	2 levels	20	14	72	304	72	16	7	70%	3.6	23.7%	5.3%	18.4%	2.3%	3.61	3.03	—
2025	27	MIX MLE	2 levels	23	15	87	367	72	31	7	65%	3.8	16.1%	8.9%	7.3%	2.3%	4.57	4.10	—
2025	27	MIX MLE	2 levels	23	15	87	367	72	31	7	65%	3.8	16.1%	8.9%	7.3%	2.3%	4.57	4.10	—
2025	27	MIX RAW	2 levels	23	15	87	367	72	31	7	65%	3.8	19.6%	8.4%	11.2%	1.9%	4.57	3.56	—
2026	28	AAA MLE	Worcester Red Sox	2	2	5	27	4	5	1	100%	2.3	14.8%	18.5%	-3.7%	3.7%	9.64	6.23	—
2026	28	AAA MLE	Worcester Red Sox	2	2	5	27	4	5	1	100%	2.3	14.8%	18.5%	-3.7%	3.7%	9.64	6.23	—
2026	28	AAA RAW	Worcester Red Sox	2	2	5	27	4	5	1	100%	2.3	14.8%	18.5%	-3.7%	3.7%	9.64	7.39	—
▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded)
2027	29	MLB	BOS	1	1	7	30	5	3	1	100%	7.0	15.7%	8.8%	6.8%	2.8%	4.81	4.81	+0.0
▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%)
2028	30	MLB MLE	BOS	9	9	55	233	38	21	7	100%	6.1	16.1%	9.2%	6.9%	3.0%	4.87	4.94	+0.3
2029	31	MLB MLE	BOS	8	8	47	197	32	19	6	100%	5.8	16.2%	9.5%	6.7%	3.2%	4.99	5.10	+0.2
2028	30	MLB CTX	BOS	3	3	20	84	14	8	3	100%	6.7	16.1%	9.2%	6.9%	3.0%	4.87	4.94	+0.1
2029	31	MLB CTX	BOS	4	4	26	110	18	10	4	100%	6.5	16.2%	9.5%	6.7%	3.2%	4.99	5.10	+0.1
▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected)
Career	—	RAW		8	8	46	195	31	18	6	100%	5.8	16.2%	9.4%	6.8%	3.1%	4.94	4.65	+0.4
/ 200 IP	—	RAW		33	33	200	844	135	78	26	100%	6.1	16.2%	9.4%	6.8%	3.1%	4.94	4.65	+1.7
Career	—	MLE		98	49	305	1311	235	124	43	50%	3.1	18.0%	9.5%	8.5%	3.3%	4.78	4.59	+0.5
/ 200 IP	—	MLE		64	32	200	860	154	82	28	50%	3.1	18.0%	9.5%	8.5%	3.3%	4.78	4.59	+0.9

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 AAAWorcester Red Sox · 5 IPFIP 6.23 → 6.37 (+0.14)K% 14.8% → 12.7%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	14.81%	—	×0.860	12.74%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	18.52%	—	×0.900	16.67%
HR / BF /BF	3.70%	÷1.000	×1.100	4.07%

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 6.23 → 6.37, 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 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 63 IPFIP 3.65 → 4.31 (+0.66)K% 20.9% → 16.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	20.90%	—	×0.810	16.93%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.58%	—	×1.100	9.44%
HR / BF /BF	2.24%	÷1.021	×1.200	2.63%

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 104).

Result: FIP 3.65 → 4.31, 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).

2025 AAALouisville Bats · 23 IPFIP 3.31 → 3.52 (+0.21)K% 16.2% → 13.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	16.16%	—	×0.860	13.90%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	8.08%	—	×0.900	7.27%
HR / BF /BF	1.01%	÷0.901	×1.100	1.23%

Result: FIP 3.31 → 3.52, 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 A+Dayton Dragons · 55 IPFIP 3.10 → 3.60 (+0.50)K% 21.9% → 16.9%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	21.94%	—	×0.770	16.89%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	5.49%	—	×1.150	6.31%
HR / BF /BF	2.11%	÷1.285	×1.250	2.05%

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 157).

Result: FIP 3.10 → 3.60, 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 AAChattanooga Lookouts · 17 IPFIP 2.78 → 3.49 (+0.70)K% 29.9% → 24.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	29.85%	—	×0.810	24.18%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	4.48%	—	×1.100	4.93%
HR / BF /BF	2.99%	÷1.089	×1.200	3.29%

Result: FIP 2.78 → 3.49, 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 AANorthwest Arkansas Naturals · 72 IPFIP 4.85 → 6.04 (+1.19)K% 19.9% → 16.1%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	19.94%	—	×0.810	16.15%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	12.03%	—	×1.100	13.23%
HR / BF /BF	3.48%	÷0.872	×1.200	4.79%

Result: FIP 4.85 → 6.04, 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 AANorthwest Arkansas Naturals · 33 IPFIP 4.87 → 5.98 (+1.11)K% 18.7% → 15.2%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	18.71%	—	×0.810	15.15%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	9.68%	—	×1.100	10.65%
HR / BF /BF	3.87%	÷0.905	×1.200	5.13%

Result: FIP 4.87 → 5.98, 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).

2022 A+Hudson Valley Renegades · 36 IPFIP 1.85 → 2.98 (+1.13)K% 38.0% → 29.3%

Component	Raw	Park ÷	Level factor ×	= MLE
K% /BF	38.03%	—	×0.770	29.28%
BB% (unintentional) /BF	6.34%	—	×1.150	7.29%
HR / BF /BF	2.11%	÷1.014	×1.250	2.60%

Result: FIP 1.85 → 2.98, 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).

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
T.J. Sikkema (OGILVIE)	—	—	4.81	15.7%	8.8%	2.8%	—	5.01	16.2%	6.8%	102	+0.20	—	—	—
Enrique Lechuga L 2015 · 4.70 FIP	29	SP-	4.70	10.0%	10.5%	2.0%	.354	3.78	10.5%	4.4%	59	-0.92	3.78	137	76
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	76
Kelvin Marte L 2017 · 4.74 FIP	29	SW	4.74	16.1%	11.4%	2.8%	.300	5.25	12.0%	1.2%	71	+0.51	3.44	360	75
Everett Teaford L 2012 · 5.47 FIP	28	SW	5.47	13.3%	8.0%	4.5%	.291	4.42	13.9%	6.3%	103	-1.05	4.42	208	73
John Anderson L 2016 · 4.23 FIP	27	SP-	4.23	14.3%	8.7%	2.2%	.367	—	—	—	—	—	4.12	235	72
John Rheinecker L 2007 · 5.13 FIP	28	SW	5.13	16.7%	10.9%	3.8%	.317	—	—	—	—	—	4.14	121	71
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	71
Tyler Alexander L 2021 · 5.27 FIP	29	SW	5.27	15.7%	10.7%	3.9%	.272	—	—	—	—	—	5.27	128	71
Chris Michalak L 2001 · 4.92 FIP	30	SP-	4.92	11.0%	8.2%	3.1%	.291	4.71	7.0%	-4.3%	14	-0.21	4.71	186	70
Matt Whitehouse L 2019 · 4.07 FIP	28	SW	4.07	20.1%	10.9%	2.3%	.339	—	—	—	—	—	3.37	353	70
Onelki Garcia L 2017 · 4.02 FIP	27	SP-	4.02	16.5%	9.3%	2.1%	.328	—	—	—	—	—	2.99	164	69
Jordan Carr L 2024 · 4.42 FIP	27	SW	4.42	13.1%	8.8%	2.4%	.295	6.61	11.8%	-1.7%	47	+2.19	3.49	269	69
Kyle Hunter L 2017 · 4.50 FIP	28	SU	4.50	14.0%	6.1%	3.3%	.335	—	—	—	—	—	4.32	188	68
Edgar Olmos L 2017 · 3.64 FIP	27	SW	3.64	18.9%	9.7%	1.7%	.252	—	—	—	—	—	3.19	203	66
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	66
Miguel Pena L 2019 · 5.08 FIP	28	SW	5.08	16.0%	7.0%	4.4%	.369	—	—	—	—	—	2.98	282	66
Randy Keisler L 2005 · 5.07 FIP	29	SW	5.07	16.4%	9.9%	3.8%	.295	5.51	6.5%	0.0%	17	+0.44	5.07	135	65
Brian Flynn L 2019 · 4.49 FIP	29	SW	4.49	17.7%	10.1%	2.9%	.333	—	—	—	—	—	3.80	295	65
Duane Below L 2015 · 3.63 FIP	29	SW	3.63	12.5%	3.7%	2.0%	.266	4.57	14.7%	9.6%	140	+0.94	3.63	265	65
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	65

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	0.9	57	16.0%	9.1%	1.16	4.88
Vic Darensbourg ('05)	1.5	50	17.0%	9.3%	1.01	4.96
Brian Stokes ('10)	1.0	52	14.5%	10.1%	1.22	5.27
Tom Martin ('07)	1.6	53	15.8%	10.1%	1.02	4.92
Bob Macdonald ('90-'96, 1 WAR*)	1.2	59	18.3%*	9.8%*	1.20*	4.32*
Kevin Hickey ('81-'91, 0 WAR*)	1.2	47	17.7%*	10.2%*	1.10*	4.27*
Dave Leiper ('84-'96, 0 WAR*)	1.4	46	15.6%*	9.1%*	0.94*	4.28*