Bradenton Marauders
BRD · Florida State League Florida State League West · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 44 | 30 | +13 | 2nd of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 21.6 | 21.3 | +0.2 | 11th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 4028 | 4194 | −166 | 26th of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 98.9% | 99.1% | −0.2% | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 1 | −1 | 3rd of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 47 | 38 | +8 | 6th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 64.2% | 64.0% | +0.2% | 14th of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 31 | 16 | +14 | 30th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -47 | 0 | −47 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.44 | 0.00 | −0.44 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 4.93 | 5.56 | −0.63 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.36 | 5.56 | −0.20 | 12th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .439 | .500 | −.061 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .461 | .502 | −.041 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -2.3 | -0.2 | −2.1 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .417 | .498 | −.081 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .419 | .503 | −.084 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .375 | .476 | −.101 | 19th of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .444 | .526 | −.082 | 26th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .434 | .475 | −.041 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .549 | .500 | +.049 | 9th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 7 | 6 | — | 8th of 30 |
|
Rank is among the A 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".