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 .284vs RHH xwOBA .328Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 47%Changeup 19%Sweeper 19%Curveball 12%Cutter 3%

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 .308
  1. 1 JW Jordan Walker RHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Four-Seam Fastball (47% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 318 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 AB Alec Burleson LHB .347
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (47% usage) projects to .371 xwOBA over 532 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 232 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 IH Iván Herrera RHB .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Four-Seam Fastball (47% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 397 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Four-Seam Fastball (47% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 187 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Four-Seam Fastball (47% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 542 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .286
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Four-Seam Fastball (47% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .284
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Four-Seam Fastball (47% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 NG Nolan Gorman LHB .302
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nolan Gorman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (47% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 365 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 160 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 66 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .284
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Four-Seam Fastball (47% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 206 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .257 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 55 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.