FCL Braves
F-BRV · Florida Complex League Florida Complex League South · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 27 | 20 | +6 | 12th of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 19.6 | 18.9 | +0.7 | 23rd of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2180 | 1910 | +269 | 13th of 81 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 97.6% | 99.2% | −1.5% | 69th of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 35 | 0 | +34 | 1st of 81 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 28 | 25 | +2 | 28th of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 62.8% | 62.2% | +0.5% | 39th of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 7 | 8 | −1 | 20th of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -150 | 0 | −150 | 80th of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | -2.63 | -0.00 | −2.63 | 79th of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 4.33 | 6.22 | −1.89 | 80th of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 6.96 | 6.23 | +0.73 | 57th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .316 | .500 | −.184 | 74th of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .296 | .502 | −.206 | 80th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | 1.1 | -0.1 | +1.2 | 23rd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .529 | .492 | +.037 | 37th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .176 | .503 | −.327 | 77th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .000 | .533 | −.533 | 41st of 58 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .429 | .560 | −.131 | 67th of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .207 | .439 | −.232 | 75th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .316 | .501 | −.185 | 70th of 81 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 2 | 5 | −3 | 74th 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".