DSL Royals Ventura
D-ROV · Dominican Summer League Dominican Summer League West · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 19 | 20 | −1 | 40th of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 18.8 | 18.9 | −0.1 | 35th of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2279 | 2137 | +141 | 23rd 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 | 20 | 26 | −6 | 67th of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 53.4% | 63.4% | −10.0% | 75th of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 11 | 10 | — | 46th of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | 118 | 0 | +118 | 7th of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | 2.19 | -0.00 | +2.19 | 7th of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 7.13 | 6.20 | +0.93 | 16th of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 4.94 | 6.20 | −1.26 | 11th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .722 | .500 | +.222 | 2nd of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .661 | .503 | +.158 | 8th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | 3.3 | -0.2 | +3.5 | 8th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .737 | .496 | +.241 | 4th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .778 | .500 | +.278 | 9th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .500 | .525 | −.025 | 30th of 61 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .704 | .557 | +.147 | 9th of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .741 | .443 | +.298 | 2nd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .677 | .501 | +.176 | 8th of 81 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 13 | 5 | +7 | 1st 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".