Head to head · 2026 batting

Pete Crow-Armstrong vs Zach Neto

In 2026 Pete Crow-Armstrong has been worth 4.0 more wins. Both lines are computed from play-by-play on the same constants, so they are measured the same way rather than quoted from two sources.

Both among the 25 most valuable hitters of 2026 by dbWAR.
Their 2025 seasons were among each other's nearest on rate statistics.

Pete Crow-Armstrong CHC

Zach Neto LAA

2026 season

2026 batting. The stronger figure in each row is highlighted — for strikeout rate that is the lower one.
Statistic	Pete Crow-Armstrong	Zach Neto
G	162	157
PA	726	704
H	175	148
HR	45	27
RBI	107	77
SB	41	24
AVG	.280	.239
OBP	.372	.330
SLG	.570	.436
OPS	.943	.766
ISO	.291	.197
BB%	11.4%	9.9%
K%	25.8%	30.5%
wOBA	.402	.339
wRC+	157	120
WAR	8.7	4.7

Postseason

Box-score figures only: October is kept out of the season constants, so there is no wOBA, FIP or dbWAR for it.

Every published postseason, batting, summed with the rates recomputed from the counts.
Statistic	Pete Crow-Armstrong	Zach Neto
G	10	—
PA	37	—
H	5	—
HR	0	—
RBI	3	—
BB	2	—
SO	16	—
SB	2	—
AVG	.147	—
OBP	.194	—
SLG	.147	—
OPS	.342	—

Career

Totalled over the seasons published here, which is not the same as a whole career: a player who debuted before 2005 begins at 2005, not at his real first game.

Career batting totals. AVG and SLG are recomputed from the components rather than averaged; OBP, wOBA and wRC+ need each season’s own constants and are left to the season table.
Statistic	Pete Crow-Armstrong	Zach Neto
G	448	522
PA	1,802	2,189
H	409	477
2B	81	111
3B	18	7
HR	86	85
RBI	250	250
BB	136	162
SO	447	581
SB	105	85
AVG	.255	.244
SLG	.489	.439
WAR	13.6	13.7

Pete Crow-Armstrong’s full profile →Zach Neto’s full profile →

More head to heads

The same seasons, measured against somebody else.

Pete Crow-Armstrong vs

Zach Neto vs

How these are computed

wOBA uses linear weights measured from this season’s own play-by-play rather than published constants, and wRC+ is park-adjusted against that same league. dbWAR is our own open implementation — not fWAR or bWAR — and the full derivation, including its simplifications, is on the methodology page. To put these two beside a third, the comparison page takes up to four.