Norfolk Tides
NOR · International League International League East · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 35 | 32 | +2 | 5th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 26.2 | 26.9 | −0.6 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 1897 | 2176 | −279 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 30.3% | 35.4% | −5.0% | 22nd of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 105 | −105 | 17th of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 43 | 45 | −2 | 18th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 70.3% | 73.8% | −3.5% | 20th of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 25 | 27 | −2 | 12th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -161 | 0 | −161 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -1.10 | 0.00 | −1.10 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 4.33 | 5.31 | −0.98 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.43 | 5.31 | +0.12 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .395 | .500 | −.105 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .398 | .501 | −.103 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -0.5 | -0.1 | −0.4 | 14th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .548 | .503 | +.045 | 10th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .300 | .501 | −.201 | 29th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .350 | .507 | −.157 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .397 | .516 | −.119 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .392 | .484 | −.092 | 28th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .375 | .501 | −.126 | 29th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 3 | 6 | −3 | 30th 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".