PITCHER MATCHUP

Cal Quantrill vs Miami Marlins

How the Miami Marlins's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Cal Quantrill's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Cal Quantrill's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .364vs RHH xwOBA .347Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 24%Splitter 23%Cutter 21%Four-Seam Fastball 17%Curveball 10%Slider 4%Changeup 1%

How the Miami Marlins's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Miami Marlins's top-9-by-AB hitters against Cal Quantrill, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .321
  1. 1 OL Otto Lopez RHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Otto Lopez
    • Sinker (24% usage) projects to .375 xwOBA over 302 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (23% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 349 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (10% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 252 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 XE Xavier Edwards SH .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Xavier Edwards
    • Sinker (24% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 232 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (23% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 451 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (10% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JM Jakob Marsee LHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jakob Marsee
    • Sinker (24% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (23% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 230 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (10% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 KS Kyle Stowers LHB .343
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kyle Stowers
    • Sinker (24% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (23% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .373 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 358 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (10% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 JS Javier Sanoja RHB .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Javier Sanoja
    • Sinker (24% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (23% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 197 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (10% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 HH Heriberto Hernández RHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Heriberto Hernández
    • Sinker (24% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (23% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (10% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  7. 7 OC Owen Caissie LHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Owen Caissie
    • Sinker (24% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (23% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (10% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 JM Joe Mack LHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Joe Mack
    • Sinker (24% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (23% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (10% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 GC Griffin Conine LHB .334
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Griffin Conine
    • Sinker (24% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (23% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .386 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (10% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 44 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.