Greenville Drive
GVL · South Atlantic League South Atlantic League South · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 22 | 26 | −4 | 26th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 21.7 | 22.7 | −1.1 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 4714 | 4120 | +593 | 1st of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 100.0% | 94.4% | +5.6% | 1st of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 0 | — | 1st of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 33 | 34 | −1 | 16th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 58.8% | 63.7% | −5.0% | 24th of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 18 | 17 | — | 15th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -68 | 0 | −68 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -0.62 | 0.00 | −0.62 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 5.73 | 5.55 | +0.18 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 6.35 | 5.54 | +0.80 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .445 | .500 | −.055 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .453 | .501 | −.048 | 24th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -0.8 | -0.1 | −0.7 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .481 | .498 | −.017 | 16th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .450 | .499 | −.049 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .462 | .508 | −.046 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .389 | .523 | −.134 | 29th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .500 | .477 | +.023 | 11th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .487 | .510 | −.022 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 8 | 6 | +1 | 3rd of 30 |
|
Rank is among the A+ 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".