Jaden Hamm
P Erie SeaWolves| Year | Age | Lvl / Team | G | GS | IP | ERA | FIP | K% | BB% | WAR | MLE rates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 20 | MIX2 levels | 5 | 5 | 12 | 0.00 | 1.35 | 29.3% | 2.4% | — | K 29.3% · BB 2.4% · FIP 0.94 | |
| 2024 | 21 | A+DET | 24 | 23 | 99 | 2.64 | 2.63 | 30.6% | 7.8% | — | K 23.5% · BB 8.9% · FIP 3.79 | |
| 2025 | 22 | MIX2 levels | 22 | 22 | 88 | 4.70 | 4.17 | 20.8% | 9.6% | — | K 17.1% · BB 9.8% · FIP 4.79 | |
| 2026 | 23 | No MLB games played | ||||||||||
| 2027PROJ | 24 | MLBDET | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4.90 | 4.90 | 18.4% | 10.2% | 0.0 | ||
| 2028PROJ32% MLB | 25 | MLBDET | 4 | 4 | 21 | 4.71 | 4.67 | 19.7% | 9.8% | 0.2 | ||
| 2029PROJ52% MLB | 26 | MLBDET | 5 | 5 | 32 | 4.62 | 4.59 | 20.3% | 9.6% | 0.3 | ||
Contract
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) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 20 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 5 | 5 | 12 | 41 | 12 | 1 | 0 | 100% | 2.4 | 29.3% | 2.4% | 26.8% | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.94 | — |
| 2023 | 20 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 5 | 5 | 12 | 41 | 12 | 1 | 0 | 100% | 2.4 | 29.3% | 2.4% | 26.8% | 0.0% | 0.00 | 1.35 | — |
| 2024 | 21 | A+ MLE | West Michigan Whitecaps | 24 | 23 | 99 | 399 | 122 | 31 | 8 | 96% | 4.1 | 23.5% | 8.9% | 14.6% | 2.8% | 2.64 | 3.79 | — |
| 2024 | 21 | A+ MLE | West Michigan Whitecaps | 24 | 23 | 99 | 399 | 122 | 31 | 8 | 96% | 4.1 | 23.5% | 8.9% | 14.6% | 2.8% | 2.64 | 3.79 | — |
| 2024 | 21 | A+ RAW | West Michigan Whitecaps | 24 | 23 | 99 | 399 | 122 | 31 | 8 | 96% | 4.1 | 30.6% | 7.8% | 22.8% | 2.0% | 2.64 | 2.63 | — |
| 2025 | 22 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 22 | 22 | 88 | 384 | 80 | 37 | 11 | 100% | 4.0 | 17.1% | 9.8% | 7.3% | 3.5% | 4.70 | 4.79 | — |
| 2025 | 22 | MIX MLE | 2 levels | 22 | 22 | 88 | 384 | 80 | 37 | 11 | 100% | 4.0 | 17.1% | 9.8% | 7.3% | 3.5% | 4.70 | 4.79 | — |
| 2025 | 22 | MIX RAW | 2 levels | 22 | 22 | 88 | 384 | 80 | 37 | 11 | 100% | 4.0 | 20.8% | 9.6% | 11.2% | 2.9% | 4.70 | 4.17 | — |
| ▸ 2027 season — projected remainder (no 2027 stats recorded) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2027 | 24 | MLB | DET | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100% | 1.0 | 18.4% | 10.2% | 8.2% | 3.1% | 4.90 | 4.90 | +0.0 |
| ▸ Career projection (2028+) — MLB context, MLB playing time (IP × MLB%) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 2028 | 25 | MLB MLE | DET | 11 | 11 | 66 | 277 | 54 | 27 | 8 | 100% | 6.0 | 19.7% | 9.8% | 9.9% | 3.1% | 4.78 | 4.74 | +0.5 |
| 2029 | 26 | MLB MLE | DET | 10 | 10 | 62 | 260 | 53 | 25 | 8 | 100% | 6.2 | 20.3% | 9.6% | 10.7% | 3.0% | 4.69 | 4.66 | +0.5 |
| 2030 | 27 | MLB MLE | DET | 11 | 11 | 65 | 273 | 61 | 24 | 8 | 100% | 5.9 | 22.3% | 8.8% | 13.5% | 3.1% | 4.51 | 4.41 | +0.8 |
| 2031 | 28 | MLB MLE | DET | 10 | 10 | 61 | 258 | 57 | 23 | 8 | 100% | 6.1 | 22.2% | 8.9% | 13.3% | 3.2% | 4.50 | 4.49 | +0.7 |
| 2032 | 29 | MLB MLE | DET | 9 | 9 | 57 | 239 | 53 | 22 | 8 | 100% | 6.3 | 22.0% | 9.2% | 12.8% | 3.3% | 4.57 | 4.62 | +0.5 |
| 2033 | 30 | MLB MLE | DET | 8 | 8 | 51 | 215 | 47 | 20 | 8 | 100% | 6.4 | 21.6% | 9.5% | 12.2% | 3.5% | 4.71 | 4.80 | +0.4 |
| 2028 | 25 | MLB CTX | DET | 4 | 4 | 21 | 89 | 17 | 9 | 3 | 100% | 5.2 | 19.7% | 9.8% | 9.9% | 2.9% | 4.71 | 4.67 | +0.2 |
| 2029 | 26 | MLB CTX | DET | 5 | 5 | 32 | 135 | 27 | 13 | 4 | 100% | 6.4 | 20.3% | 9.6% | 10.7% | 2.9% | 4.62 | 4.59 | +0.3 |
| 2030 | 27 | MLB CTX | DET | 7 | 7 | 41 | 173 | 39 | 15 | 5 | 100% | 5.9 | 22.3% | 8.8% | 13.5% | 3.0% | 4.44 | 4.34 | +0.5 |
| 2031 | 28 | MLB CTX | DET | 7 | 7 | 44 | 186 | 41 | 17 | 6 | 100% | 6.3 | 22.2% | 8.9% | 13.3% | 3.1% | 4.43 | 4.42 | +0.5 |
| 2032 | 29 | MLB CTX | DET | 7 | 7 | 44 | 186 | 41 | 17 | 6 | 100% | 6.3 | 22.0% | 9.2% | 12.8% | 3.2% | 4.49 | 4.54 | +0.4 |
| 2033 | 30 | MLB CTX | DET | 7 | 7 | 41 | 173 | 37 | 16 | 6 | 100% | 5.9 | 21.6% | 9.5% | 12.2% | 3.4% | 4.63 | 4.72 | +0.3 |
| ▸ Career totals — MLB only (actual + projected) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Career | — | RAW | 37 | 37 | 223 | 943 | 203 | 87 | 29 | 100% | 6.0 | 21.6% | 9.2% | 12.3% | 3.1% | 4.53 | 4.15 | +3.3 | |
| / 200 IP | — | RAW | 33 | 33 | 200 | 844 | 182 | 78 | 26 | 100% | 6.0 | 21.6% | 9.2% | 12.3% | 3.1% | 4.53 | 4.15 | +3.0 | |
| Career | — | MLE | 51 | 50 | 199 | 824 | 171 | 74 | 25 | 98% | 3.9 | 20.8% | 9.0% | 11.8% | 3.0% | 3.39 | 4.12 | +3.3 | |
| / 200 IP | — | MLE | 51 | 50 | 200 | 828 | 172 | 74 | 25 | 98% | 3.9 | 20.8% | 9.0% | 11.8% | 3.0% | 3.39 | 4.12 | +1.8 | |
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.
2025 AAErie SeaWolves · 83 IPFIP 4.12 → 4.79 (+0.68)K% 21.1% → 17.1%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 21.05% | — | ×0.810 | 17.05% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 8.86% | — | ×1.100 | 9.75% |
| HR / BF /BF | 3.05% | ÷1.056 | ×1.200 | 3.46% |
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 4.12 → 4.79, 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 ALakeland Flying Tigers · 5 IPFIP 4.39 → 5.26 (+0.88)K% 17.4% → 12.9%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 17.39% | — | ×0.740 | 12.87% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 21.74% | — | ×1.180 | 25.65% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷0.864 | ×1.300 | 0.00% |
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 73).
Result: FIP 4.39 → 5.26, 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+West Michigan Whitecaps · 99 IPFIP 2.60 → 3.79 (+1.19)K% 30.6% → 23.5%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 30.58% | — | ×0.770 | 23.54% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 7.77% | — | ×1.150 | 8.93% |
| HR / BF /BF | 2.01% | ÷0.889 | ×1.250 | 2.82% |
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 78).
Result: FIP 2.60 → 3.79, 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 ALakeland Flying Tigers · 11 IPFIP 0.99 → 1.68 (+0.70)K% 28.9% → 21.4%
| Component | Raw | Park ÷ | Level factor × | = MLE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K% /BF | 28.95% | — | ×0.740 | 21.42% |
| BB% (unintentional) /BF | 2.63% | — | ×1.180 | 3.11% |
| HR / BF /BF | 0.00% | ÷1.216 | ×1.300 | 0.00% |
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 143).
Result: FIP 0.99 → 1.68, 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 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 | 2.1 | 61 | 20.9% | 9.4% | 1.23 | 4.67 |
| Josias Manzanillo ('04) | 1.7 | 57 | 20.0% | 10.2% | 1.21 | 4.71 |
| Jacob Barnes ('25) | 1.7 | 48 | 22.0% | 9.2% | 1.15 | 4.79 |
| Luis Vizcaino ('09) | 2.7 | 68 | 21.0% | 10.1% | 1.30 | 4.33 |
| Bill Scherrer ('82-'88, 1 WAR*) | 1.6 | 62 | 20.7%* | 10.2%* | 1.19* | 4.44* |
| Bob Macdonald ('90-'96, 1 WAR*) | 1.2 | 59 | 18.3%* | 9.8%* | 1.20* | 4.32* |
| Bill Pleis ('61-'66, -0 WAR*) | 1.4 | 56 | 19.7%* | 9.8%* | 1.15* | 4.53* |