Norfolk Tides
NOR · International League International League East · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 28 | 28 | — | 13th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 26.3 | 26.9 | −0.6 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 1386 | 1599 | −213 | 21st of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 30.7% | 35.1% | −4.4% | 19th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 0 | 80 | −80 | 16th of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 41 | 39 | +1 | 10th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 68.4% | 72.4% | −4.0% | 22nd of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 22 | 20 | +1 | 19th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | -145 | 0 | −145 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | -1.29 | 0.00 | −1.29 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 4.17 | 5.43 | −1.26 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.46 | 5.43 | +0.03 | 18th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .348 | .500 | −.152 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .379 | .501 | −.122 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -3.4 | -0.1 | −3.3 | 25th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .500 | .503 | −.003 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .273 | .500 | −.227 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .333 | .505 | −.172 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .340 | .518 | −.178 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .355 | .482 | −.127 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .329 | .502 | −.173 | 29th of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 3 | 5 | −2 | 30th of 30 |
|
Rank is among the AAA 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".