Greenville Drive
GVL · South Atlantic League South Atlantic League South · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 22 | 25 | −3 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 21.7 | 22.7 | −1.1 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 4528 | 3937 | +590 | 1st of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 100.0% | 94.3% | +5.7% | 1st of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 0 | — | 1st of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 32 | 33 | −1 | 16th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 59.9% | 63.5% | −3.7% | 24th of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 18 | 16 | +1 | 18th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -68 | 0 | −68 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.65 | 0.00 | −0.65 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 5.79 | 5.58 | +0.21 | 13th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 6.44 | 5.58 | +0.86 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .448 | .500 | −.052 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .452 | .501 | −.049 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -0.5 | -0.1 | −0.4 | 16th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .480 | .498 | −.018 | 17th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .436 | .499 | −.063 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .462 | .507 | −.045 | 16th of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .389 | .516 | −.127 | 29th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .510 | .484 | +.026 | 11th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .493 | .509 | −.016 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 8 | 6 | +1 | 3rd 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".