Albuquerque Isotopes
ABQ · Pacific Coast League Pacific Coast League East · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 28 | 29 | −1 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 26.7 | 26.9 | −0.2 | 19th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2146 | 1764 | +381 | 9th of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 42.6% | 35.1% | +7.5% | 9th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 86 | −86 | 16th of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 40 | 41 | −1 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 84.4% | 72.9% | +11.5% | 3rd of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 26 | 22 | +3 | 20th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -36 | 0 | −36 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.29 | -0.00 | −0.29 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 6.48 | 5.40 | +1.08 | 2nd of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 6.77 | 5.40 | +1.37 | 28th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .496 | .500 | −.004 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .480 | .501 | −.021 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | 2.0 | -0.1 | +2.1 | 8th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .419 | .502 | −.083 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .500 | .500 | — | 16th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .700 | .508 | +.192 | 5th of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .484 | .514 | −.030 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .508 | .486 | +.022 | 11th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .568 | .500 | +.068 | 7th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 7 | 6 | +1 | 6th 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".