Tacoma Rainiers
TAC · Pacific Coast League Pacific Coast League West · 2026Roster construction
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitters used | 33 | 32 | — | 13th of 30 |
|
| Plate-appearance-weighted batting age | 28.5 | 26.9 | +1.6 | 2nd of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 683 | 2176 | −1493 | 28th of 30 |
|
| Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under | 10.0% | 35.4% | −25.3% | 28th of 30 |
|
| Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older | 380 | 105 | +274 | 2nd of 30 |
|
Staff shape
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pitchers used | 33 | 45 | −12 | 30th of 30 |
|
| Share of innings thrown by starters | 72.1% | 73.8% | −1.7% | 16th of 30 |
|
| Blown saves | 25 | 27 | −2 | 12th of 30 |
|
Results
| Metric | Value | Lg avg | Diff | Rank | Percentile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run differential | 17 | 0 | +17 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Run differential per game | 0.11 | -0.00 | +0.11 | 16th of 30 |
|
| Runs scored per game | 5.29 | 5.31 | −0.02 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Runs allowed per game | 5.18 | 5.32 | −0.14 | 16th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage | .480 | .500 | −.020 | 20th of 30 |
|
| Pythagorean winning percentage | .510 | .501 | +.009 | 15th of 30 |
|
| Wins above Pythagorean expectation | -4.5 | -0.1 | −4.4 | 27th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in one-run games | .467 | .503 | −.036 | 22nd of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in games decided by five or more | .538 | .501 | +.037 | 10th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage in extra innings | .500 | .507 | −.007 | 14th of 30 |
|
| Home winning percentage | .507 | .516 | −.009 | 17th of 30 |
|
| Road winning percentage | .453 | .484 | −.031 | 19th of 30 |
|
| Winning percentage within the division | .448 | .501 | −.053 | 23rd of 30 |
|
| Longest winning streak | 7 | 6 | — | 7th 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".