PITCHER MATCHUP

Framber Valdez vs Kansas City Royals

How the Kansas City Royals'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 .264vs RHH xwOBA .317Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 46%Curveball 31%Changeup 19%Slider 4%Four-Seam Fastball 1%

How the Kansas City Royals's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .313
  1. 1 SP Salvador Perez RHB .355
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Salvador Perez
    • Sinker (46% usage) projects to .414 xwOBA over 254 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 166 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 269 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 JC Jac Caglianone LHB .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jac Caglianone
    • Sinker (46% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 CJ Carter Jensen LHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carter Jensen
    • Sinker (46% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 IC Isaac Collins SH .296
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Isaac Collins
    • Sinker (46% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 VP Vinnie Pasquantino LHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Vinnie Pasquantino
    • Sinker (46% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 223 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 200 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 155 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 LT Lane Thomas RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Lane Thomas
    • Sinker (46% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 209 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 MM Michael Massey LHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Massey
    • Sinker (46% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 NL Nick Loftin RHB .296
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nick Loftin
    • Sinker (46% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 SM Starling Marte RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Starling Marte
    • Sinker (46% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 145 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-07-26 game page →