DSL Royals Ventura
D-ROV · Dominican Summer League Dominican Summer League West · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 19 | 20 | −1 | 40th of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 18.8 | 18.9 | −0.1 | 35th of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 2197 | 2090 | +106 | 24th 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 | 20 | 26 | −6 | 65th of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 51.0% | 63.1% | −12.1% | 76th of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 11 | 9 | +1 | 47th of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | 100 | 0 | +100 | 9th of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | 1.92 | -0.00 | +1.92 | 8th of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 6.87 | 6.20 | +0.67 | 19th of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 4.94 | 6.20 | −1.26 | 12th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .731 | .500 | +.231 | 3rd of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .646 | .503 | +.143 | 9th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | 4.4 | -0.2 | +4.6 | 6th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .778 | .495 | +.283 | 2nd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .765 | .502 | +.264 | 9th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .500 | .525 | −.025 | 30th of 61 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .731 | .556 | +.175 | 7th of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .731 | .444 | +.287 | 3rd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .690 | .501 | +.189 | 7th of 81 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 13 | 5 | +7 | 1st 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".