PITCHER MATCHUP

Clay Holmes vs St. Louis Cardinals

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

Clay Holmes's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .332vs RHH xwOBA .300Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 45%Sweeper 19%Changeup 14%Slider 9%Cutter 7%Four-Seam Fastball 4%Curveball 2%

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .312
  1. 1 AB Alec Burleson LHB .339
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 254 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 208 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 488 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 IH Iván Herrera RHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 249 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 172 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 346 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JW Jordan Walker RHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 204 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .266 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 279 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 154 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 266 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 257 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 519 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .285
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .250 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .252 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 BJ Blaze Jordan RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Blaze Jordan
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-08-14 game page →