PITCHER MATCHUP

Framber Valdez vs Chicago Cubs

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

Framber Valdez's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .277vs RHH xwOBA .316Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 45%Curveball 31%Changeup 18%Slider 4%Four-Seam Fastball 2%

How the Chicago Cubs's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .321
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 448 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 267 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .338
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 221 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 AB Alex Bregman RHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 428 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 266 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MB Michael Busch LHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 242 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 212 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 245 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 IH Ian Happ SH .329
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 226 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .248 xwOBA over 330 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 203 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .348
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .387 xwOBA over 370 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 151 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 305 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .304
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 316 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .257 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 170 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 271 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 234 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 183 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 MC Michael Conforto LHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Conforto
    • Sinker (45% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 176 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 182 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 138 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.