PITCHER MATCHUP

Brandon Pfaadt vs Texas Rangers

How the Texas Rangers's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Brandon Pfaadt's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Brandon Pfaadt's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .342vs RHH xwOBA .312Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 26%Sinker 21%Sweeper 18%Changeup 15%Curveball 11%Cutter 9%Slider 1%

How the Texas Rangers's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Texas Rangers's top-9-by-AB hitters against Brandon Pfaadt, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .312
  1. 1 BN Brandon Nimmo LHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brandon Nimmo
    • Four-Seam Fastball (26% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 665 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 299 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (18% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (15% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 173 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 JB Jake Burger RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jake Burger
    • Four-Seam Fastball (26% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 365 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 318 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (18% usage) projects to .246 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (15% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 99 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 ED Ezequiel Duran RHB .287
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ezequiel Duran
    • Four-Seam Fastball (26% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 279 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 189 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (18% usage) projects to .259 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (15% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .263 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 WL Wyatt Langford RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Wyatt Langford
    • Four-Seam Fastball (26% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 472 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 324 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (18% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (15% usage) projects to .256 xwOBA over 157 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 JJ Josh Jung RHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Josh Jung
    • Four-Seam Fastball (26% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 291 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 247 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (18% usage) projects to .252 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (15% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  6. 6 EC Evan Carter LHB .292
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Evan Carter
    • Four-Seam Fastball (26% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 273 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 124 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (18% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (15% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  7. 7 CS Corey Seager LHB .343
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Corey Seager
    • Four-Seam Fastball (26% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 334 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 243 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (18% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (15% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 178 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .389 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  8. 8 JP Joc Pederson LHB .336
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Joc Pederson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (26% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 353 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .375 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (18% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (15% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 177 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  9. 9 LO Logan O'Hoppe RHB .298
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Logan O'Hoppe
    • Four-Seam Fastball (26% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 314 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 241 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (18% usage) projects to .256 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (15% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

No meeting currently scheduled — this is a durable season matchup read.