El Paso Chihuahuas
ELP · Pacific Coast League Pacific Coast League East · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 28 | 26 | +1 | 10th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 28.5 | 26.9 | +1.6 | 4th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 152 | 1439 | −1287 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 3.4% | 34.6% | −31.2% | 30th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 75 | −75 | 16th of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 35 | 36 | −1 | 18th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 63.4% | 71.8% | −8.4% | 30th of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 26 | 18 | +7 | 29th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -88 | 0 | −88 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.83 | 0.00 | −0.83 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 6.23 | 5.41 | +0.82 | 4th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 7.06 | 5.41 | +1.65 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .415 | .500 | −.085 | 28th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .443 | .501 | −.058 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -3.0 | -0.1 | −2.9 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .409 | .504 | −.095 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .383 | .501 | −.118 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .364 | .499 | −.135 | 22nd of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .440 | .518 | −.078 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .393 | .482 | −.089 | 28th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .311 | .502 | −.191 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 4 | 5 | −1 | 24th of 30 |
|
Rank is among the AAA 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".