ACL Guardians
A-GUA · Arizona Complex League Arizona Complex League Central · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 22 | 20 | +1 | 26th of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 19.4 | 18.9 | +0.6 | 24th of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2167 | 2137 | +29 | 32nd of 81 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 98.3% | 99.2% | −0.9% | 64th of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 0 | — | 4th of 81 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 34 | 26 | +7 | 11th of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 65.7% | 63.4% | +2.3% | 29th of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 12 | 10 | +1 | 53rd of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | 44 | 0 | +44 | 26th of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | 0.73 | -0.00 | +0.73 | 27th of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 6.12 | 6.20 | −0.08 | 41st of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.38 | 6.20 | −0.82 | 28th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .550 | .500 | +.050 | 36th of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .558 | .503 | +.055 | 26th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -0.5 | -0.2 | −0.3 | 44th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .353 | .496 | −.143 | 70th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .550 | .500 | +.050 | 31st of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .000 | .525 | −.525 | 42nd of 61 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .667 | .557 | +.110 | 19th of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .433 | .443 | −.010 | 43rd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .591 | .501 | +.090 | 25th of 81 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 5 | 5 | — | 29th of 81 |
|
Rank is among the Rk 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".