Omaha Storm Chasers
OMA · International League International League West · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 34 | 32 | +1 | 7th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 28.2 | 26.9 | +1.3 | 5th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 1396 | 2127 | −731 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 23.2% | 35.2% | −12.0% | 24th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 140 | 103 | +36 | 11th of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 53 | 44 | +8 | 4th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 67.7% | 73.8% | −6.1% | 27th of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 42 | 27 | +14 | 30th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -88 | 0 | −88 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.62 | -0.00 | −0.62 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 5.06 | 5.32 | −0.26 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.68 | 5.33 | +0.35 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .451 | .500 | −.049 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .447 | .501 | −.054 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | 0.5 | -0.1 | +0.6 | 11th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .324 | .503 | −.179 | 29th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .469 | .501 | −.032 | 19th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .231 | .508 | −.277 | 29th of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .457 | .516 | −.059 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .444 | .484 | −.040 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .426 | .501 | −.075 | 26th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 8 | 6 | +1 | 4th 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".