FCL Nationals
F-NAT · Florida Complex League Florida Complex League East · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 21 | 20 | — | 32nd of 81 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 20.0 | 18.9 | +1.2 | 14th of 81 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 1676 | 2137 | −461 | 81st of 81 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 98.2% | 99.2% | −0.9% | 65th 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 | 48 | 26 | +21 | 1st of 81 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 61.0% | 63.4% | −2.4% | 51st of 81 |
|
| Blown saves | 8 | 10 | −2 | 20th of 81 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | 46 | 0 | +46 | 23rd of 81 |
|
| Run differential per game | 0.87 | -0.00 | +0.87 | 22nd of 81 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 5.08 | 6.20 | −1.12 | 71st of 81 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 4.21 | 6.20 | −1.99 | 2nd of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage | .491 | .500 | −.009 | 43rd of 81 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .585 | .503 | +.082 | 20th of 81 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -5.0 | -0.2 | −4.8 | 80th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .316 | .496 | −.180 | 74th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .667 | .500 | +.166 | 18th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .000 | .525 | −.525 | 42nd of 61 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .538 | .557 | −.019 | 46th of 81 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .444 | .443 | +.001 | 40th of 81 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .491 | .501 | −.010 | 46th 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".