Columbus Clippers
COL · International League International League West · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 26 | 28 | −2 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 24.8 | 26.9 | −2.1 | 29th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2942 | 1643 | +1298 | 2nd of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 68.3% | 35.2% | +33.0% | 2nd of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 82 | −82 | 16th of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 35 | 40 | −5 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 64.3% | 72.4% | −8.1% | 28th of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 14 | 20 | −6 | 3rd of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -13 | 0 | −13 | 17th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.11 | 0.00 | −0.11 | 17th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 5.60 | 5.43 | +0.17 | 12th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.71 | 5.42 | +0.28 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .530 | .500 | +.030 | 11th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .491 | .501 | −.010 | 17th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | 4.5 | -0.1 | +4.6 | 2nd of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .517 | .503 | +.014 | 13th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .394 | .499 | −.105 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .429 | .509 | −.080 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .577 | .518 | +.059 | 7th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .492 | .482 | +.010 | 13th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .565 | .501 | +.064 | 10th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 7 | 5 | +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".