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 .347vs RHH xwOBA .309Seasons 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 .325
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .318
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 545 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 413 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 251 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  2. 2 AB Alex Bregman RHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 528 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 403 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 247 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  3. 3 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .329
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 480 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 191 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 200 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 201 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MB Michael Busch LHB .343
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 568 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 218 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 193 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 IH Ian Happ SH .334
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 595 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .378 xwOBA over 211 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 306 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .348
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 458 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .400 xwOBA over 332 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 285 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 CK Carson Kelly RHB .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 318 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 214 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 170 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 MC Michael Conforto LHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Conforto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 426 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 164 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .246 xwOBA over 169 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 MA Miguel Amaya RHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Miguel Amaya
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 173 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (28% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (11% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (8% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .266 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (2% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-08-21 game page →