PITCHER MATCHUP

Foster Griffin vs San Francisco Giants

How the San Francisco Giants's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Foster Griffin's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Foster Griffin's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .302vs RHH xwOBA .323Seasons 2026
Cutter 32%Four-Seam Fastball 17%Sweeper 14%Changeup 12%Sinker 10%Curveball 9%Splitter 6%

How the San Francisco Giants's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the San Francisco Giants's top-9-by-AB hitters against Foster Griffin, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .309
  1. 1 JH Jung Hoo Lee LHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jung Hoo Lee
    • Cutter (32% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 431 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (10% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 217 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (9% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 BE Bryce Eldridge LHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bryce Eldridge
    • Cutter (32% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .400 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (10% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 DG Drew Gilbert LHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Gilbert
    • Cutter (32% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (10% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (9% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 CK Christian Koss RHB .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Koss
    • Cutter (32% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (10% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (9% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .249 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 DC Drew Cavanaugh LHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Cavanaugh
    • Cutter (32% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (10% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (9% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 OB Osleivis Basabe RHB .305
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Osleivis Basabe
    • Cutter (32% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (10% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (9% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .254 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 JC Jonah Cox RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jonah Cox
    • Cutter (32% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (10% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 17 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (9% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  8. 8 SW Shay Whitcomb RHB .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Shay Whitcomb
    • Cutter (32% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 17 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (10% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (9% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (6% usage) projects to .250 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 TH Turner Hill LHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Turner Hill
    • Cutter (32% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (17% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (10% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (9% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 6 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.