DSL Astros Orange
D-ASO · Dominican Summer League Dominican Summer League North · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 17 | 20 | −3 | 48th of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 18.3 | 18.9 | −0.6 | 49th of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2382 | 2137 | +244 | 15th of 81 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 100.0% | 99.2% | +0.8% | 1st 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 | 26 | 26 | — | 38th of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 82.6% | 63.4% | +19.2% | 3rd of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 12 | 10 | +1 | 53rd of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | 111 | 0 | +111 | 9th of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | 2.09 | -0.00 | +2.09 | 8th of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 6.70 | 6.20 | +0.50 | 27th of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 4.60 | 6.20 | −1.60 | 6th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .623 | .500 | +.123 | 13th of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .665 | .503 | +.162 | 6th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -2.2 | -0.2 | −2.0 | 63rd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .556 | .496 | +.060 | 22nd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .789 | .500 | +.288 | 7th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | 1.000 | .525 | +.475 | 1st of 61 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .577 | .557 | +.020 | 35th of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .667 | .442 | +.225 | 5th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .677 | .501 | +.176 | 7th 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".