PITCHER MATCHUP

Cionel Pérez vs Kansas City Royals

How the Kansas City Royals's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Cionel Pérez's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Cionel Pérez's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .311vs RHH xwOBA .350Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 35%SV 29%Four-Seam Fastball 18%Curveball 11%Slider 6%

How the Kansas City Royals's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Kansas City Royals's top-9-by-AB hitters against Cionel Pérez, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .321
  1. 1 SP Salvador Perez RHB .358
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Salvador Perez
    • Sinker (35% usage) projects to .423 xwOBA over 257 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (29% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (18% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 457 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 282 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 BW Bobby Witt Jr. RHB .357
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bobby Witt Jr.
    • Sinker (35% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 308 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (29% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (18% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 486 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 311 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 JC Jac Caglianone LHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jac Caglianone
    • Sinker (35% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (29% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Four-Seam Fastball (18% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .417 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 CJ Carter Jensen LHB .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carter Jensen
    • Sinker (35% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (29% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Four-Seam Fastball (18% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 155 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 IC Isaac Collins SH .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Isaac Collins
    • Sinker (35% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (29% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Four-Seam Fastball (18% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 381 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 66 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 MM Michael Massey LHB .285
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Massey
    • Sinker (35% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (29% usage) projects to .235 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Four-Seam Fastball (18% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 344 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 VP Vinnie Pasquantino LHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Vinnie Pasquantino
    • Sinker (35% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 224 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (29% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (18% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 560 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 MG Maikel Garcia RHB .329
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Maikel Garcia
    • Sinker (35% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 336 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (29% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (18% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 464 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 252 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 NL Nick Loftin RHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nick Loftin
    • Sinker (35% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (29% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Four-Seam Fastball (18% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 216 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 94 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.