Tacoma Rainiers
TAC · Pacific Coast League Pacific Coast League West · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 30 | 26 | +3 | 5th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 28.3 | 26.9 | +1.3 | 6th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 400 | 1439 | −1039 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 9.3% | 34.6% | −25.2% | 27th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 261 | 75 | +185 | 1st of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 26 | 36 | −10 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 67.2% | 71.8% | −4.6% | 22nd of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 17 | 18 | −1 | 14th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | 18 | 0 | +18 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | 0.17 | 0.00 | +0.17 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 5.24 | 5.41 | −0.17 | 17th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.07 | 5.41 | −0.34 | 14th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .421 | .500 | −.079 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .515 | .501 | +.014 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -10.1 | -0.1 | −10.0 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .324 | .504 | −.180 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .586 | .501 | +.085 | 8th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .250 | .499 | −.249 | 26th of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .429 | .518 | −.089 | 26th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .412 | .482 | −.070 | 26th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .355 | .502 | −.147 | 28th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 4 | 5 | −1 | 24th 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".