PREVIEW Starts 4:05 PM ET · Oracle Park
August 9, 2026 · NL West

Detroit Tigers at San Francisco Giants

August 9, 20264:05 PM ETOracle Park
AWAY
Detroit Tigers
56-59
—
@
HOME
San Francisco Giants
48-67
—

Probable starters

AWAY · DET
Troy Melton
Troy Melton
HOME · SF
Logan Webb
Logan Webb

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 · DET Projected · top 9 by AB
BATTER 2026 SEASON PROJ OPS
AVGOBPSLGOPSHRRBIK
1 Kevin McGonigle SS · L .284 .391 .431 .822 12 44 69 .755
2 Riley Greene LF · L .276 .367 .459 .826 16 54 127 .766
3 Dillon Dingler C · R .278 .341 .536 .877 26 78 99 .728
4 Spencer Torkelson 1B · R .218 .307 .419 .726 20 58 141 .743
5 Colt Keith 3B · L .275 .321 .425 .746 8 31 62 .741
6 Zach McKinstry 2B · L .216 .296 .326 .622 4 23 49 .710
7 Gleyber Torres 2B · R .268 .385 .404 .789 7 29 51 .729
8 Hao-Yu Lee 2B · R .263 .293 .418 .711 6 27 51 .746
9 James Outman CF · L .173 .232 .321 .553 5 17 70 .712
HOME · SF Projected · top 9 by AB
BATTER 2026 SEASON PROJ OPS
AVGOBPSLGOPSHRRBIK
1 Rafael Devers 1B · L .248 .322 .474 .796 23 62 129 .766
2 Willy Adames SS · R .221 .279 .408 .687 18 47 129 .729
3 Jung Hoo Lee RF · L .303 .338 .449 .787 8 43 43 .728
4 Bryce Eldridge DH · L .255 .348 .439 .787 11 28 78 .752
5 Drew Gilbert CF · L .241 .327 .353 .680 4 21 43 .733
6 Daniel Susac C · R .257 .305 .397 .702 3 22 32 .737
7 Drew Cavanaugh C · L .250 .364 .268 .632 0 4 16 .742
8 Christian Koss 2B · R .167 .216 .188 .404 0 1 10 .722
9 Grant McCray CF · L .107 .286 .214 .500 1 2 10 .731

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.

DET starter vs Giants lineup

Troy Melton (RHP)

Lineup avg xwOBA .317
  1. 1 RD Rafael Devers LHB .362
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Rafael Devers
    • Four-Seam Fastball (38% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 584 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (19% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 211 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 151 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (10% usage) projects to .385 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 286 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .396 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 WA Willy Adames RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Willy Adames
    • Four-Seam Fastball (38% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 588 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (19% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 273 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 140 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (10% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 354 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  3. 3 JH Jung Hoo Lee LHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jung Hoo Lee
    • Four-Seam Fastball (38% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 395 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (19% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (10% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 BE Bryce Eldridge LHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bryce Eldridge
    • Four-Seam Fastball (38% usage) projects to .412 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (19% usage) projects to .266 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Splitter (10% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 DG Drew Gilbert LHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Gilbert
    • Four-Seam Fastball (38% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (19% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (10% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 DS Daniel Susac RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Daniel Susac
    • Four-Seam Fastball (38% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (19% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 16 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (10% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 DC Drew Cavanaugh LHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Cavanaugh
    • Four-Seam Fastball (38% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (19% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Splitter (10% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  8. 8 CK Christian Koss RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Koss
    • Four-Seam Fastball (38% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (19% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (10% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 GM Grant McCray LHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Grant McCray
    • Four-Seam Fastball (38% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (19% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (10% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Troy Melton vs Giants: full season matchup breakdown →
SF starter vs Tigers lineup

Logan Webb (RHP)

Lineup avg xwOBA .310
  1. 1 KM Kevin McGonigle LHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kevin McGonigle
    • Sinker (33% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (25% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (23% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (9% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 157 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 RG Riley Greene LHB .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Riley Greene
    • Sinker (33% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 261 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (25% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 263 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (23% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .402 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (9% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 534 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 DD Dillon Dingler RHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dillon Dingler
    • Sinker (33% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 194 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (25% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (23% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 ST Spencer Torkelson RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Spencer Torkelson
    • Sinker (33% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 293 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (25% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (23% usage) projects to .251 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (9% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 411 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 CK Colt Keith LHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Colt Keith
    • Sinker (33% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 186 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (25% usage) projects to .237 xwOBA over 223 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (23% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 133 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (9% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 392 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 ZM Zach McKinstry LHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Zach McKinstry
    • Sinker (33% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (25% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (23% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (9% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 405 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  7. 7 GT Gleyber Torres RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Gleyber Torres
    • Sinker (33% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 285 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (25% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (23% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 133 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (9% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over 475 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  8. 8 HL Hao-Yu Lee RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Hao-Yu Lee
    • Sinker (33% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (25% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (23% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (9% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 JO James Outman LHB .290
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. James Outman
    • Sinker (33% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (25% usage) projects to .216 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (23% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (9% usage) projects to .252 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
Logan Webb vs Tigers: full season matchup breakdown →

Manager comparison

AWAY · DET
A.J. Hinch
A.J. Hinch
Lineup 4.1 R Bunts 0.8 R IBBs 1.2 R
HOME · SF
Tony Vitello
Tony Vitello
Lineup 2.2 R Bunts 2.7 R IBBs 2.9 R

Bullpen availability

AWAY · DET
  • Available 10
  • Limited 0
  • Rest required 0
  • Inactive 0
HOME · SF
  • Available 8
  • Limited 1
  • Rest required 0
  • Inactive 0

Recent form

AWAY · DET
6-4 W1 +51 run diff
WLWWWWLWLL
HOME · SF
4-6 L2 +1 run diff
LLWLLLWWLW

Pitching & bullpen preview

Probable starters and each bullpen's availability load in the sections above — the Tigers and Giants 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