PITCHER MATCHUP

Andrew Abbott vs Seattle Mariners

How the Seattle Mariners'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 .273vs RHH xwOBA .327Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 48%Sweeper 19%Changeup 18%Curveball 12%Cutter 3%Unknown 1%

How the Seattle Mariners's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .326
  1. 1 JN Josh Naylor LHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Josh Naylor
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 475 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 220 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 CY Cole Young LHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Cole Young
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 228 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 RA Randy Arozarena RHB .337
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Randy Arozarena
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 521 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 168 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 175 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 JC J.P. Crawford LHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. J.P. Crawford
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 496 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 CR Cal Raleigh SH .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Cal Raleigh
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 564 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 278 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 LR Luke Raley LHB .343
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Luke Raley
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .374 xwOBA over 263 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 133 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 DC Dominic Canzone LHB .359
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dominic Canzone
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .395 xwOBA over 198 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  8. 8 CE Colt Emerson LHB .302
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Colt Emerson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 17 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 MG Mitch Garver RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Mitch Garver
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 270 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (3% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 53 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-07-20 game page →