PITCHER MATCHUP

Austin Warren vs St. Louis Cardinals

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

Austin Warren's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .378vs RHH xwOBA .315Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sweeper 45%Sinker 26%Four-Seam Fastball 15%Curveball 8%Cutter 4%Changeup 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 Austin Warren, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .303
  1. 1 AB Alec Burleson LHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Sweeper (45% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (26% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 248 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 478 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (4% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 JW Jordan Walker RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Sweeper (45% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (26% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 194 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 271 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (4% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Sweeper (45% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (26% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (4% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 IH Iván Herrera RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Sweeper (45% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (26% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 240 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 333 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (4% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Sweeper (45% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (26% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 259 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 503 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (4% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .296
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Sweeper (45% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (26% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (4% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .291
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Sweeper (45% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (26% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (4% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .267
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Sweeper (45% usage) projects to .245 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (26% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 189 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (4% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 LN Lars Nootbaar LHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Lars Nootbaar
    • Sweeper (45% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (26% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 374 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (4% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 74 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.