PREVIEW Starts 6:00 PM ET · Truist Park
October 7, 2026 · NL East

Los Angeles Dodgers at Atlanta Braves

October 7, 20266:00 PM ETTruist Park
AWAY
Los Angeles Dodgers
2-1
—
@
HOME
Atlanta Braves
1-2
—

Probable starters

AWAY · LAD
HOME · ATL

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 · LAD Projected · top 9 by AB
BATTER 2026 SEASON PROJ OPS
AVGOBPSLGOPSHRRBIK
1 Freddie Freeman 1B · L .288 .362 .430 .792 16 70 116 .760
2 Kyle Tucker RF · L .233 .330 .385 .715 17 70 105 .767
3 Andy Pages CF · R .274 .343 .468 .811 23 85 113 .745
4 Max Muncy 3B · L .252 .348 .490 .838 29 76 140 .730
5 Mookie Betts SS · R .257 .326 .454 .780 23 69 58 .747
6 Teoscar Hernández LF · R .267 .334 .425 .759 16 64 135 .728
7 Tommy Edman 2B · S .247 .329 .385 .714 8 42 67 .708
8 Will Smith C · R .260 .355 .426 .781 10 34 45 .743
9 Miguel Rojas 2B · R .267 .312 .391 .703 4 23 27 .697
HOME · ATL Projected · top 9 by AB
BATTER 2026 SEASON PROJ OPS
AVGOBPSLGOPSHRRBIK
1 Matt Olson 1B · L .251 .321 .502 .823 41 93 171 .764
2 Ozzie Albies 2B · S .237 .293 .392 .685 22 73 105 .723
3 Michael Harris II CF · L .294 .321 .491 .812 26 87 119 .737
4 Mauricio Dubón LF · R .276 .321 .399 .720 12 73 73 .701
5 Austin Riley 3B · R .219 .290 .364 .654 19 72 201 .741
6 Drake Baldwin C · L .284 .358 .459 .817 25 79 132 .749
7 Ronald Acuña Jr. RF · R .255 .345 .451 .796 20 55 103 .776
8 Mike Yastrzemski LF · L .224 .309 .380 .689 12 41 98 .711
9 Lane Thomas LF · R .224 .318 .383 .701 11 40 93 .714

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.

LAD starter vs Braves lineup

Tyler Glasnow (RHP)

Lineup avg xwOBA .319
  1. 1 MO Matt Olson LHB .339
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Matt Olson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (37% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 685 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 265 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 330 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (14% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Knuckle Curve (10% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 OA Ozzie Albies SH .292
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ozzie Albies
    • Four-Seam Fastball (37% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 520 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 246 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (14% usage) projects to .253 xwOBA over 175 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Knuckle Curve (10% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 MH Michael Harris II LHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Harris II
    • Four-Seam Fastball (37% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 426 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 224 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 309 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (14% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Knuckle Curve (10% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MD Mauricio Dubón RHB .294
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Mauricio Dubón
    • Four-Seam Fastball (37% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 421 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 201 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 249 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (14% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Knuckle Curve (10% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 AR Austin Riley RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Austin Riley
    • Four-Seam Fastball (37% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 499 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 212 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 267 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (14% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Knuckle Curve (10% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  6. 6 DB Drake Baldwin LHB .348
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drake Baldwin
    • Four-Seam Fastball (37% usage) projects to .384 xwOBA over 263 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 140 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (14% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Knuckle Curve (10% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 RA Ronald Acuña Jr. RHB .352
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ronald Acuña Jr.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (37% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 363 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .415 xwOBA over 223 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (14% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Knuckle Curve (10% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 16 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 MY Mike Yastrzemski LHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Mike Yastrzemski
    • Four-Seam Fastball (37% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 538 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 167 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 196 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (14% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Knuckle Curve (10% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 LT Lane Thomas RHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Lane Thomas
    • Four-Seam Fastball (37% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 300 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 224 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (14% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Knuckle Curve (10% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Tyler Glasnow vs Braves: full season matchup breakdown →
ATL starter vs Dodgers lineup

Tyler Mahle (RHP)

Lineup avg xwOBA .324
  1. 1 FF Freddie Freeman LHB .336
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Freddie Freeman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 636 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (30% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 228 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 KT Kyle Tucker LHB .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kyle Tucker
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .368 xwOBA over 532 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (30% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 132 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 197 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 AP Andy Pages RHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Andy Pages
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 497 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (30% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 265 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MM Max Muncy LHB .340
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Max Muncy
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .389 xwOBA over 339 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (30% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 182 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 MB Mookie Betts RHB .336
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Mookie Betts
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 508 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (30% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 250 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  6. 6 TH Teoscar Hernández RHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Teoscar Hernández
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 439 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (30% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .222 xwOBA over 299 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  7. 7 TE Tommy Edman SH .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Tommy Edman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 287 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (30% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 WS Will Smith RHB .343
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Will Smith
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .379 xwOBA over 385 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (30% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 201 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  9. 9 MR Miguel Rojas RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Miguel Rojas
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 268 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (30% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 17 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Tyler Mahle vs Dodgers: full season matchup breakdown →

Manager comparison

AWAY · LAD
Dave Roberts
Lineup 2.1 R Bunts 1.5 R IBBs 6.5 R
HOME · ATL
Walt Weiss
Lineup 4.4 R Bunts 1.7 R IBBs 3.1 R

Bullpen availability

AWAY · LAD
  • Available 5
  • Limited 0
  • Rest required 0
  • Inactive 1
HOME · ATL
  • Available 8
  • Limited 0
  • Rest required 0
  • Inactive 0

Recent form

AWAY · LAD
8-2 W3 +28 run diff
WWWLLWWWWW
HOME · ATL
5-5 L1 +1 run diff
LWLLWLWWWL

Pitching & bullpen preview

Probable starters and each bullpen's availability load in the sections above — the Dodgers and Braves 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.