PITCHER MATCHUP

Eduardo Rodriguez vs St. Louis Cardinals

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

Eduardo Rodriguez's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .347vs RHH xwOBA .317Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 43%Changeup 24%Cutter 15%Curveball 9%Sinker 8%Slider 2%

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .310
  1. 1 AB Alec Burleson LHB .352
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 524 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 231 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .389 xwOBA over 274 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 JW Jordan Walker RHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 307 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 232 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 IH Iván Herrera RHB .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 385 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 176 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 535 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 279 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .295
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .290
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 105 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 NG Nolan Gorman LHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nolan Gorman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 361 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .278
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 203 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .240 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (8% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 159 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.