PITCHER MATCHUP

Clay Holmes vs Miami Marlins

How the Miami Marlins'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 .323vs RHH xwOBA .298Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 45%Sweeper 19%Changeup 14%Cutter 9%Slider 7%Four-Seam Fastball 3%Curveball 3%

How the Miami Marlins's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .314
  1. 1 OL Otto Lopez RHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Otto Lopez
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .372 xwOBA over 346 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .231 xwOBA over 199 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (7% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 281 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 396 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (3% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 XE Xavier Edwards SH .305
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Xavier Edwards
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 254 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (7% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 481 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (3% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 105 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JM Jakob Marsee LHB .318
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jakob Marsee
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (7% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 287 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (3% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JS Javier Sanoja RHB .298
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Javier Sanoja
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (7% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 233 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (3% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 HH Heriberto Hernández RHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Heriberto Hernández
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (7% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 220 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (3% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 KS Kyle Stowers LHB .326
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kyle Stowers
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 157 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (7% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 410 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (3% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  7. 7 JM Joe Mack LHB .304
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Joe Mack
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (7% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (3% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 OC Owen Caissie LHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Owen Caissie
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (7% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (3% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  9. 9 GC Griffin Conine LHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Griffin Conine
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 53 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (7% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .423 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (3% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 37 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.