ACL Royals Gold
A-ROG · Arizona Complex League Arizona Complex League West · 2021Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 22 | 23 | −1 | 29th of 82 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 20.0 | 19.3 | +0.7 | 31st of 82 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 1422 | 1932 | −510 | 82nd of 82 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 100.0% | 99.6% | +0.4% | 1st of 82 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 0 | — | 2nd of 82 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 23 | 25 | −2 | 30th of 82 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 80.4% | 66.6% | +13.7% | 7th of 82 |
|
| Blown saves | 5 | 8 | −3 | 9th of 82 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -17 | 0 | −17 | 48th of 82 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.36 | -0.01 | −0.35 | 51st of 82 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 4.89 | 4.96 | −0.07 | 36th of 82 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.26 | 4.98 | +0.28 | 53rd of 82 |
|
| Winning percentage | .383 | .499 | −.116 | 70th of 82 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .467 | .498 | −.032 | 51st of 82 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -3.9 | 0.0 | −3.9 | 77th of 82 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .250 | .494 | −.244 | 79th of 82 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .500 | .508 | −.008 | 40th of 82 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | 1.000 | .509 | +.491 | 1st of 66 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .500 | .527 | −.027 | 47th of 82 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .261 | .470 | −.209 | 77th of 82 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .343 | .494 | −.151 | 58th of 68 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 4 | 5 | −1 | 41st of 82 |
|
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".