DSL Tampa Bay
D-TAM · Dominican Summer League Dominican Summer League Northwest · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 17 | 20 | −3 | 48th of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 18.5 | 18.9 | −0.4 | 41st of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2698 | 2137 | +560 | 4th 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 | 25 | 26 | −1 | 45th of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 54.2% | 63.4% | −9.2% | 70th of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 15 | 10 | +4 | 74th of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | 38 | 0 | +38 | 29th of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | 0.70 | -0.00 | +0.70 | 28th of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 6.28 | 6.20 | +0.08 | 38th of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.57 | 6.20 | −0.63 | 33rd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .611 | .500 | +.111 | 15th of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .554 | .503 | +.051 | 26th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | 3.1 | -0.2 | +3.3 | 11th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .556 | .495 | +.061 | 23rd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .611 | .500 | +.110 | 27th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .500 | .525 | −.025 | 30th of 61 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .577 | .557 | +.020 | 35th of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .643 | .442 | +.201 | 7th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .677 | .501 | +.176 | 7th of 81 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 7 | 5 | +1 | 15th 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".