Sugar Land Space Cowboys
SUG · Pacific Coast League Pacific Coast League East · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 37 | 32 | +4 | 3rd of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 28.4 | 26.9 | +1.5 | 3rd of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 732 | 2176 | −1444 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 11.9% | 35.4% | −23.4% | 27th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 238 | 105 | +132 | 8th 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 | 69.2% | 73.8% | −4.6% | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 17 | 27 | −10 | 1st of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -34 | 0 | −34 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.23 | 0.00 | −0.23 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 4.62 | 5.31 | −0.69 | 28th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 4.85 | 5.31 | −0.46 | 10th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .497 | .500 | −.003 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .478 | .501 | −.023 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | 2.8 | -0.1 | +2.9 | 8th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .565 | .503 | +.062 | 7th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .431 | .501 | −.070 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .625 | .507 | +.118 | 5th of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .554 | .516 | +.038 | 11th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .440 | .484 | −.044 | 22nd of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .474 | .500 | −.026 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 7 | 6 | — | 7th 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".