DSL White Sox
D-WSX · Dominican Summer League Dominican Summer League Southwest · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 15 | 20 | −5 | 71st of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 17.9 | 18.9 | −1.0 | 71st of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 1902 | 2137 | −235 | 64th 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 | 22 | 26 | −4 | 57th of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 59.1% | 63.4% | −4.3% | 55th of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 9 | 10 | −1 | 31st of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -83 | 0 | −83 | 66th of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | -1.51 | -0.00 | −1.51 | 66th of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 6.00 | 6.20 | −0.20 | 44th of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 7.51 | 6.20 | +1.31 | 72nd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .345 | .500 | −.155 | 72nd of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .399 | .503 | −.104 | 66th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -2.9 | -0.2 | −2.7 | 71st of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .500 | .496 | +.004 | 37th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .333 | .500 | −.168 | 62nd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .000 | .525 | −.525 | 42nd of 61 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .519 | .557 | −.038 | 48th of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .179 | .443 | −.264 | 79th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .323 | .501 | −.178 | 68th 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".