PITCHER MATCHUP

Connor Prielipp vs St. Louis Cardinals

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

Connor Prielipp's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .316vs RHH xwOBA .319Seasons 2026
Slider 30%Four-Seam Fastball 30%Curveball 17%Changeup 12%Sinker 11%

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .314
  1. 1 AB Alec Burleson LHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Slider (30% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 185 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (30% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 478 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 201 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 248 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 JW Jordan Walker RHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Slider (30% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 150 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (30% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 271 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 194 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Slider (30% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (30% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 IH Iván Herrera RHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Slider (30% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 164 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (30% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 333 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 240 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Slider (30% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 250 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (30% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 503 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 259 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Slider (30% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (30% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Slider (30% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (30% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .287
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Slider (30% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (30% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 189 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 LN Lars Nootbaar LHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Lars Nootbaar
    • Slider (30% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (30% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 374 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 225 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.