Head to head · 2026 batting

Jackson Chourio vs Pete Crow-Armstrong

In 2026 Pete Crow-Armstrong has been worth 4.8 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.

Their 2025 seasons were among each other's nearest on rate statistics.

Jackson Chourio MIL

Pete Crow-Armstrong CHC

2026 season

2026 batting. The stronger figure in each row is highlighted — for strikeout rate that is the lower one.
Statistic	Jackson Chourio	Pete Crow-Armstrong
G	127	162
PA	573	726
H	152	175
HR	25	45
RBI	75	107
SB	23	41
AVG	.291	.280
OBP	.351	.372
SLG	.487	.570
OPS	.837	.943
ISO	.195	.291
BB%	8.2%	11.4%
K%	23.4%	25.8%
wOBA	.362	.402
wRC+	130	157
WAR	3.9	8.7

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	Jackson Chourio	Pete Crow-Armstrong
G	25	10
PA	109	37
H	32	5
HR	6	0
RBI	20	3
BB	3	2
SO	23	16
SB	4	2
AVG	.311	.147
OBP	.330	.194
SLG	.534	.147
OPS	.864	.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	Jackson Chourio	Pete Crow-Armstrong
G	403	448
PA	1,735	1,802
H	445	409
2B	91	81
3B	8	18
HR	67	86
RBI	232	250
BB	116	136
SO	376	447
SB	66	105
AVG	.278	.255
SLG	.471	.489
WAR	9.7	13.6

Jackson Chourio’s full profile →Pete Crow-Armstrong’s full profile →

More head to heads

The same seasons, measured against somebody else.

Jackson Chourio vs

Pete Crow-Armstrong 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.