ACL Dodgers
A-DOD · Arizona Complex League Arizona Complex League Central · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 31 | 19 | +11 | 5th of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 20.7 | 18.9 | +1.8 | 4th of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2096 | 1762 | +333 | 12th of 81 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 96.1% | 99.2% | −3.0% | 77th 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 | 39 | 25 | +13 | 5th of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 51.3% | 61.1% | −9.8% | 68th of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 20 | 8 | +11 | 81st of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -45 | 0 | −45 | 61st of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.76 | -0.00 | −0.76 | 57th of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 6.66 | 6.25 | +0.41 | 30th of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 7.42 | 6.26 | +1.16 | 69th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .424 | .500 | −.076 | 60th of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .451 | .502 | −.051 | 57th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -1.6 | -0.1 | −1.5 | 60th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .333 | .493 | −.160 | 66th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .455 | .503 | −.048 | 51st of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .250 | .527 | −.277 | 36th of 58 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .483 | .560 | −.077 | 61st of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .367 | .440 | −.072 | 55th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .478 | .501 | −.023 | 47th of 81 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 4 | 4 | — | 44th 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".