PREVIEW Starts 7:10 PM ET · Kauffman Stadium
August 8, 2026 · AL Cent

Chicago Cubs at Kansas City Royals

August 8, 20267:10 PM ETKauffman Stadium
AWAY
Chicago Cubs
67-49
—
@
HOME
Kansas City Royals
48-68
—

Probable starters

AWAY
TBD
HOME · KC
Seth Lugo
Seth Lugo

Lineups

Lineups are usually announced ~90 minutes before first pitch. Check back soon.

Hitter season stats

Season-to-date lines for each hitter in the projected lineup, with a Marcel projection (Proj OPS). Season columns are 2026 to date; Proj is a forward-looking estimate, not a result.

AWAY · CHC Projected · top 9 by AB
BATTER 2026 SEASON PROJ OPS
AVGOBPSLGOPSHRRBIK
1 Nico Hoerner 2B · R .260 .321 .363 .684 7 54 45 .723
2 Alex Bregman 3B · R .248 .338 .384 .722 12 50 83 .738
3 Michael Busch 1B · L .241 .352 .390 .742 14 63 117 .748
4 Pete Crow-Armstrong CF · L .289 .386 .550 .936 26 69 136 .744
5 Ian Happ LF · S .211 .323 .404 .727 18 48 148 .735
6 Dansby Swanson SS · R .217 .294 .406 .700 17 63 101 .713
7 Seiya Suzuki RF · R .270 .364 .476 .840 19 64 111 .749
8 Carson Kelly C · R .265 .352 .381 .733 7 40 50 .712
9 Michael Conforto DH · L .227 .323 .448 .771 9 24 58 .706
HOME · KC Projected · top 9 by AB
BATTER 2026 SEASON PROJ OPS
AVGOBPSLGOPSHRRBIK
1 Salvador Perez DH · R .215 .263 .376 .639 16 48 93 .713
2 Jac Caglianone RF · L .254 .309 .453 .762 18 45 112 .732
3 Bobby Witt Jr. SS · R .286 .356 .457 .813 13 41 74 .792
4 Carter Jensen C · L .228 .301 .415 .716 15 54 127 .751
5 Isaac Collins LF · S .238 .337 .366 .703 6 34 86 .726
6 Michael Massey 2B · L .263 .297 .426 .723 9 39 53 .711
7 Nick Loftin 3B · R .249 .332 .399 .731 5 35 38 .717
8 Kyle Isbel CF · L .243 .293 .347 .640 3 13 42 .705
9 Starling Marte RF · R .255 .311 .314 .625 1 12 37 .700

Pitcher vs. lineup projection

Projected expected wOBA for each probable starter against the opposing lineup, by batting order. A season-to-date matchup read — forward-looking, not a result.

KC starter vs Cubs lineup

Seth Lugo (RHP)

Lineup avg xwOBA .323
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 535 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 396 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 150 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 249 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  2. 2 AB Alex Bregman RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 518 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 381 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 242 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  3. 3 MB Michael Busch LHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 550 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 214 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 184 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 220 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  4. 4 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 459 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 192 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 195 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 IH Ian Happ SH .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 586 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .374 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 290 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 185 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 99 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 475 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 302 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .373 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 264 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 446 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .398 xwOBA over 320 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 274 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 310 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 206 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 166 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 MC Michael Conforto LHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Conforto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 417 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .369 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 164 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
Seth Lugo vs Cubs: full season matchup breakdown →

Manager comparison

AWAY · CHC
Craig Counsell
Craig Counsell
Lineup 3.3 R Bunts 0.7 R IBBs 0.9 R
HOME · KC
Matt Quatraro
Matt Quatraro
Lineup 3.7 R Bunts 2.4 R IBBs 1.8 R

Bullpen availability

AWAY · CHC
  • Available 5
  • Limited 0
  • Rest required 0
  • Inactive 0
HOME · KC
  • Available 6
  • Limited 3
  • Rest required 0
  • Inactive 0

Recent form

AWAY · CHC
7-3 W4 +20 run diff
WWWWLWLWLW
HOME · KC
4-6 L1 -6 run diff
LWWLLLLWLW

Pitching & bullpen preview

Probable starters and each bullpen's availability load in the sections above — the Cubs and Royals staffs going in.

Once the game ends, a full pitching and bullpen breakdown appears here: starter lines, the relief sequence and each arm's role, pitch counts, and where the game turned.

Keep reading

How RunsLeft analyzes games

Standard content on this page comes from the MLB Stats API. The pitching analysis describes how the game was pitched — the starter's line, the bullpen sequence and each arm's role (opener, bulk, setup, closer), pitch counts as a fatigue signal, and the leverage context where the game turned. Reliever roles are inferred from how the manager used each arm up to that date. It describes structure and constraints; it does not grade the manager.

Read the full methodology.

← All matchups