PITCHER MATCHUP

Jacob Misiorowski vs Chicago Cubs

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

Jacob Misiorowski's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .230vs RHH xwOBA .269Seasons 2026–2025
Four-Seam Fastball 60%Slider 21%Curveball 12%Changeup 4%Cutter 2%

How the Chicago Cubs's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .319
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .318
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (60% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 496 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 231 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (4% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (2% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 AB Alex Bregman RHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (60% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 471 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (4% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (2% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (60% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 409 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 105 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (4% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 178 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (2% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 IH Ian Happ SH .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (60% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 540 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 176 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (4% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 269 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (2% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 MB Michael Busch LHB .340
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (60% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 503 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 202 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (4% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (2% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (60% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 440 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 245 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (4% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (2% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  7. 7 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (60% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 401 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over 260 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (4% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (2% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (60% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 287 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 157 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (4% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (2% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 MS Matt Shaw RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Matt Shaw
    • Four-Seam Fastball (60% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (21% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (4% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (2% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-06-26 game page →