ACL Cubs
A-CUB · Arizona Complex League Arizona Complex League East · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 23 | 20 | +2 | 20th of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 19.8 | 18.9 | +0.9 | 18th of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2183 | 2137 | +45 | 29th of 81 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 100.0% | 99.2% | +0.8% | 1st of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 0 | — | 4th of 81 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 41 | 26 | +14 | 3rd of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 65.2% | 63.4% | +1.8% | 30th of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 14 | 10 | +3 | 66th of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -83 | 0 | −83 | 67th of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | -1.41 | -0.00 | −1.41 | 65th of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 5.81 | 6.20 | −0.39 | 49th of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 7.22 | 6.20 | +1.02 | 66th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .339 | .500 | −.161 | 73rd of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .402 | .503 | −.101 | 65th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -3.7 | -0.2 | −3.5 | 74th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .429 | .495 | −.066 | 56th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .267 | .501 | −.234 | 67th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | 1.000 | .525 | +.475 | 1st of 61 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .310 | .557 | −.247 | 78th of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .367 | .442 | −.075 | 54th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .250 | .501 | −.251 | 78th of 81 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 2 | 5 | −3 | 74th of 81 |
|
Rank is among the Rk clubs with a value for that metric, best first. Descriptive metrics (roster age, WAR concentration) are ranked but not colored — for them, "high" isn't "good".