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 .331Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Cutter 34%Curveball 21%Sinker 19%Four-Seam Fastball 13%Splitter 5%Slider 5%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 .311
  1. 1 RD Rafael Devers LHB .346
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Rafael Devers
    • Cutter (34% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 151 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .377 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 286 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (13% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 582 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (5% usage) projects to .389 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .376 xwOBA over 211 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 99 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 WA Willy Adames RHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Willy Adames
    • Cutter (34% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 140 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .246 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 354 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (13% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 587 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (5% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 273 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 145 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JH Jung Hoo Lee LHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jung Hoo Lee
    • Cutter (34% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (13% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 393 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (5% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 BE Bryce Eldridge LHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bryce Eldridge
    • Cutter (34% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (13% usage) projects to .392 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (5% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 DG Drew Gilbert LHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Gilbert
    • Cutter (34% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (13% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (5% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 DS Daniel Susac RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Daniel Susac
    • Cutter (34% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (13% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (5% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 16 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 DC Drew Cavanaugh LHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Cavanaugh
    • Cutter (34% 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).
    • Curveball (21% 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 (19% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (13% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (5% 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).
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% 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 .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Koss
    • Cutter (34% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (13% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (5% 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).
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 GM Grant McCray LHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Grant McCray
    • Cutter (34% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (21% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (13% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Splitter (5% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 11 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.