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 .275vs RHH xwOBA .355Seasons 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 .336
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 232 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 461 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 177 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 JW Jordan Walker RHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 250 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 17 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 IH Iván Herrera RHB .339
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 229 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 310 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 249 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 486 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 235 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .305
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .282
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 184 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .265 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 JF José Fermín RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 LN Lars Nootbaar LHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Lars Nootbaar
    • Sinker (30% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 214 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (23% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 360 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (14% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-07-03 game page →