Zach Penrod
P Rochester Red Wings| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 27 | MIX3 levels | 29 | 12 | 67 | 4.05 | 2.86 | 33.4% | 12.9% | 1.4 | K 29.0% · BB 12.1% · FIP 3.37 |
| 2025 | 28 | MIX2 levels | 26 | 6 | 33 | 7.83 | 5.68 | 17.9% | 20.7% | — | K 14.7% · BB 18.5% · FIP 5.28 |
| 2026 | 29 | AAAWSH | 36 | 9 | 46 | 4.27 | 5.22 | 19.2% | 16.0% | — | K 16.6% · BB 14.4% · FIP 5.22 |
| 2027PROJ | 30 | MLBWSH | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5.37 | 5.37 | 18.0% | 14.4% | -0.0 | |
| 2028PROJ37% MLB | 31 | MLBWSH | 7 | 0 | 7 | 5.38 | 5.46 | 18.1% | 14.2% | -0.1 |
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) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2018 | 21 | ROK MLE | AZL Rangers | 4 | 3 | 12 | 56 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 75% | 2.9 | 19.4% | 13.4% | 6.0% | 7.5% | 6.17 | 7.27 | — |
| 2018 | 21 | ROK RAW | AZL Rangers | 4 | 3 | 12 | 56 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 75% | 2.9 | 28.6% | 10.7% | 17.9% | 5.4% | 6.17 | 5.24 | — |
| 2023 | 26 | A+ MLE | Greenville Drive | 4 | 4 | 21 | 89 | 20 | 11 | 1 | 100% | 5.2 | 17.3% | 14.2% | 3.1% | 1.5% | 2.18 | 4.27 | — |
| 2023 | 26 | A+ RAW | Greenville Drive | 4 | 4 | 21 | 89 | 20 | 11 | 1 | 100% | 5.2 | 22.5% | 12.4% | 10.1% | 1.1% | 2.18 | 3.39 | — |
| 2024 | 27 | MIX MLE | 3 levels | 29 | 12 | 67 | 287 | 96 | 37 | 5 | 41% | 2.3 | 29.0% | 12.1% | 16.9% | 2.2% | 4.05 | 3.37 | +0.9 |
| 2024 | 27 | MIX MLE | 3 levels | 29 | 12 | 67 | 287 | 96 | 37 | 5 | 41% | 2.3 | 29.0% | 12.1% | 16.9% | 2.2% | 4.05 | 3.37 | +0.9 |
| 2024 | 27 | MIX RAW | 3 levels | 29 | 12 | 67 | 287 | 96 | 37 | 5 | 41% | 2.3 | 33.4% | 12.9% | 20.6% | 1.7% | 4.05 | 2.86 | +1.4 |
| 2025 | 28 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 26 | 6 | 33 | 179 | 32 | 37 | 3 | 23% | 1.3 | 14.7% | 18.5% | -3.8% | 2.0% | 7.83 | 5.28 | — |
| 2025 | 28 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 26 | 6 | 33 | 179 | 32 | 37 | 3 | 23% | 1.3 | 14.7% | 18.5% | -3.8% | 2.0% | 7.83 | 5.28 | — |
| 2025 | 28 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 26 | 6 | 33 | 179 | 32 | 37 | 3 | 23% | 1.3 | 17.9% | 20.7% | -2.8% | 1.7% | 7.83 | 5.68 | — |
| 2026 | 29 | AAA MLE | Rochester Red Wings | 36 | 9 | 46 | 213 | 41 | 34 | 6 | 25% | 1.3 | 16.6% | 14.4% | 2.2% | 3.1% | 4.27 | 5.22 | — |
| 2026 | 29 | AAA MLE | Rochester Red Wings | 36 | 9 | 46 | 213 | 41 | 34 | 6 | 25% | 1.3 | 16.6% | 14.4% | 2.2% | 3.1% | 4.27 | 5.22 | — |
| 2026 | 29 | AAA RAW | Rochester Red Wings | 36 | 9 | 46 | 213 | 41 | 34 | 6 | 25% | 1.3 | 19.2% | 16.0% | 3.3% | 2.8% | 4.27 | 5.22 | — |
| ▸ Career totals (raw MLB only — as recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| MLB Career | — | 7 | 0 | 4 | 20 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 0% | 0.6 | 15.0% | 20.0% | -5.0% | 0.0% | 2.25 | 4.60 | -0.0 | ||
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 30 | MLB | WSH | 2 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.0% | 14.4% | 3.6% | 2.9% | 5.37 | 5.37 | -0.0 |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 31 | MLB MLE | WSH | 17 | 0 | 18 | 75 | 14 | 11 | 2 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.1% | 14.2% | 3.9% | 3.1% | 5.38 | 5.46 | -0.2 |
| 2028 | 31 | MLB CTX | WSH | 7 | 0 | 7 | 30 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0% | 1.0 | 18.1% | 14.2% | 3.9% | 3.1% | 5.38 | 5.46 | -0.1 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 13 | 0 | 11 | 47 | 8 | 8 | 1 | 0% | 0.8 | 16.8% | 16.7% | 0.1% | 1.8% | 4.19 | 4.78 | -0.0 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 251 | 0 | 200 | 904 | 152 | 152 | 19 | 0% | 0.8 | 16.8% | 16.7% | 0.1% | 1.8% | 4.19 | 4.78 | -0.5 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 99 | 34 | 179 | 824 | 171 | 119 | 22 | 34% | 1.8 | 20.8% | 14.4% | 6.4% | 2.7% | 4.74 | 4.63 | -0.2 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 111 | 38 | 200 | 922 | 191 | 133 | 24 | 34% | 1.8 | 20.8% | 14.4% | 6.4% | 2.7% | 4.74 | 4.63 | -1.7 | |
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 · 46 IPFIP 5.04 → 5.22 (+0.18)K% 19.2% → 16.6%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 19.25% | — | ×0.860 | 16.55% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 15.96% | — | ×0.900 | 14.37% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.82% | ÷1.000 | ×1.100 | 3.10% |
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 5.04 → 5.22, 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 AAAOklahoma City Comets · 32 IPFIP 5.20 → 5.28 (+0.08)K% 17.1% → 14.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 17.14% | — | ×0.860 | 14.74% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 20.57% | — | ×0.900 | 18.51% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.71% | ÷0.956 | ×1.100 | 1.97% |
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 91).
Result: FIP 5.20 → 5.28, 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 AAPortland Sea Dogs · 35 IPFIP 2.27 → 3.19 (+0.92)K% 37.1% → 30.0%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 37.06% | — | ×0.810 | 30.02% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 9.09% | — | ×1.100 | 10.00% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.10% | ÷1.018 | ×1.200 | 2.47% |
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 2.27 → 3.19, 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).
2024 AAAWorcester Red Sox · 27 IPFIP 3.30 → 3.57 (+0.27)K% 32.3% → 27.7%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 32.26% | — | ×0.860 | 27.74% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 16.13% | — | ×0.900 | 14.52% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.61% | ÷0.996 | ×1.100 | 1.78% |
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 99).
Result: FIP 3.30 → 3.57, 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 A+Greenville Drive · 21 IPFIP 3.38 → 4.27 (+0.88)K% 22.5% → 17.3%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 22.47% | — | ×0.770 | 17.30% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 12.36% | — | ×1.150 | 14.21% |
| HR / BF /BF | 1.12% | ÷0.931 | ×1.250 | 1.51% |
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 86).
Result: FIP 3.38 → 4.27, 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).
2018 ROKAZL Rangers · 12 IPFIP 4.98 → 7.27 (+2.29)K% 28.6% → 19.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 28.57% | — | ×0.680 | 19.43% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 10.71% | — | ×1.250 | 13.39% |
| HR / BF /BF | 5.36% | ÷1.000 | ×1.400 | 7.50% |
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 4.98 → 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).