PITCHER MATCHUP

Andrew Abbott vs St. Louis Cardinals

How the St. Louis Cardinals's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Andrew Abbott's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Andrew Abbott's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .271vs RHH xwOBA .326Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 48%Sweeper 19%Changeup 18%Curveball 12%Cutter 3%Unknown 1%

How the St. Louis Cardinals's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the St. Louis Cardinals's top-9-by-AB hitters against Andrew Abbott, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .314
  1. 1 AB Alec Burleson LHB .355
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .377 xwOBA over 476 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .368 xwOBA over 198 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 JW Jordan Walker RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 268 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .375 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 IH Iván Herrera RHB .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 329 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .304
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 499 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .296
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .292
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .282
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 LN Lars Nootbaar LHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Lars Nootbaar
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 373 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-07-26 game page →