PITCHER MATCHUP

Andrew Painter vs St. Louis Cardinals

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

Andrew Painter's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .322vs RHH xwOBA .337Seasons 2026
Four-Seam Fastball 33%Slider 18%Sweeper 16%Changeup 9%Sinker 9%Splitter 9%Curveball 6%

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 Painter, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .306
  1. 1 AB Alec Burleson LHB .337
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 527 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 215 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (16% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 231 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .375 xwOBA over 275 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (9% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 JW Jordan Walker RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 312 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 191 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (16% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 146 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 233 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (9% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 IH Iván Herrera RHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 392 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 193 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (16% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 281 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (9% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (16% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (9% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 16 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .302
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 540 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 260 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (16% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 279 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (9% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .295
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (16% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (9% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .288
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (16% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (9% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 NG Nolan Gorman LHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nolan Gorman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 361 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 145 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (16% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 159 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (9% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .279
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 204 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (16% usage) projects to .235 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .265 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 159 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (9% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (6% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 51 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.