PITCHER MATCHUP

Clay Holmes vs Kansas City Royals

How the Kansas City Royals'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 .327vs RHH xwOBA .300Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 45%Sweeper 19%Changeup 14%Slider 9%Cutter 7%Four-Seam Fastball 4%Curveball 2%

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .312
  1. 1 SP Salvador Perez RHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Salvador Perez
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .388 xwOBA over 256 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 171 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 443 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 JC Jac Caglianone LHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jac Caglianone
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .399 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 164 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 BW Bobby Witt Jr. RHB .346
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bobby Witt Jr.
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .372 xwOBA over 303 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 171 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 187 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 307 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 177 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 465 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .371 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 CJ Carter Jensen LHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carter Jensen
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 IC Isaac Collins SH .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Isaac Collins
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .248 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 363 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 MM Michael Massey LHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Massey
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .247 xwOBA over 332 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 NL Nick Loftin RHB .281
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nick Loftin
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 202 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 KI Kyle Isbel LHB .284
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kyle Isbel
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 325 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  9. 9 SM Starling Marte RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Starling Marte
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 146 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (19% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 228 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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