Norfolk Tides
NOR · International League International League East · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 28 | 28 | — | 15th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 26.3 | 26.9 | −0.6 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 1394 | 1613 | −219 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 30.7% | 35.2% | −4.5% | 19th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 81 | −81 | 16th of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 41 | 39 | +1 | 10th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 68.6% | 72.4% | −3.9% | 22nd of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 22 | 20 | +1 | 19th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -144 | 0 | −144 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -1.27 | 0.00 | −1.27 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 4.17 | 5.44 | −1.27 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.44 | 5.43 | +0.01 | 18th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .354 | .500 | −.146 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .380 | .501 | −.121 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -2.9 | -0.1 | −2.8 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .515 | .503 | +.012 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .273 | .500 | −.227 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .333 | .505 | −.172 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .353 | .518 | −.165 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .355 | .482 | −.127 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .329 | .502 | −.173 | 29th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 3 | 5 | −2 | 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".