PITCHER MATCHUP

David Peterson vs St. Louis Cardinals

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

David Peterson's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .281vs RHH xwOBA .357Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 30%Four-Seam Fastball 23%Slider 21%Changeup 14%Curveball 12%

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .313
  1. 1 AB Alec Burleson LHB .338
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 257 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 489 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 208 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 IH Iván Herrera RHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 250 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 347 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 172 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JW Jordan Walker RHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 204 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 280 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 155 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 267 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 520 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 257 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 66 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .304
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .281
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 BJ Blaze Jordan RHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Blaze Jordan
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 4 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.