PITCHER MATCHUP

Aaron Civale vs San Francisco Giants

How the San Francisco Giants's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Aaron Civale's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Aaron Civale's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .321vs RHH xwOBA .313Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Cutter 36%Curveball 21%Sinker 18%Four-Seam Fastball 12%Splitter 6%Slider 4%Sweeper 3%

How the San Francisco Giants's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the San Francisco Giants's top-9-by-AB hitters against Aaron Civale, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .309
  1. 1 JH Jung Hoo Lee LHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jung Hoo Lee
    • Cutter (36% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 221 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (12% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 437 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 BE Bryce Eldridge LHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bryce Eldridge
    • Cutter (36% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (12% usage) projects to .398 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 DG Drew Gilbert LHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Gilbert
    • Cutter (36% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (12% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 159 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 CK Christian Koss RHB .297
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Koss
    • Cutter (36% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (12% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 DC Drew Cavanaugh LHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Cavanaugh
    • Cutter (36% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (12% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 JC Jonah Cox RHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jonah Cox
    • Cutter (36% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (12% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .243 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 OB Osleivis Basabe RHB .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Osleivis Basabe
    • Cutter (36% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (12% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 SW Shay Whitcomb RHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Shay Whitcomb
    • Cutter (36% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (12% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .259 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 TH Turner Hill LHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Turner Hill
    • Cutter (36% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (12% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% 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).
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

No meeting currently scheduled — this is a durable season matchup read.