PITCHER MATCHUP

Emerson Hancock vs Chicago Cubs

How the Chicago Cubs's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Emerson Hancock's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Emerson Hancock's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .346vs RHH xwOBA .308Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 35%Sinker 28%Sweeper 12%Changeup 11%Cutter 8%Slider 4%Curveball 2%

How the Chicago Cubs's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Chicago Cubs's top-9-by-AB hitters against Emerson Hancock, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .327
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 594 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 448 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 267 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  2. 2 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 526 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 221 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .372 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 AB Alex Bregman RHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 566 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 428 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 266 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  4. 4 MB Michael Busch LHB .343
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 612 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 242 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 212 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 245 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .257 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 IH Ian Happ SH .329
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 628 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .376 xwOBA over 226 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 330 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 203 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .345
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 496 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .384 xwOBA over 370 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 166 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 151 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 305 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 493 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 316 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .247 xwOBA over 170 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .383 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 271 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .248 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .305
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 345 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 234 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 183 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 MC Michael Conforto LHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Conforto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 451 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 176 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .259 xwOBA over 182 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 78 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.