PITCHER MATCHUP

Jose Quintana vs Chicago White Sox

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

Jose Quintana's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .332vs RHH xwOBA .351Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 34%Changeup 21%Four-Seam Fastball 19%Curveball 16%SV 10%

How the Chicago White Sox's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .314
  1. 1 MV Miguel Vargas RHB .338
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Miguel Vargas
    • Sinker (34% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over 308 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (21% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 526 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (10% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 CM Colson Montgomery LHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Colson Montgomery
    • Sinker (34% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (21% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 322 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (10% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  3. 3 CM Chase Meidroth RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Chase Meidroth
    • Sinker (34% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 237 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (21% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 357 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (10% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 SA Sam Antonacci LHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Sam Antonacci
    • Sinker (34% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (21% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 168 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (10% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 MM Munetaka Murakami LHB .344
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Munetaka Murakami
    • Sinker (34% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (21% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 171 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (10% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 TP Tristan Peters LHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Tristan Peters
    • Sinker (34% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (21% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (10% usage) projects to .270 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 AB Andrew Benintendi LHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Andrew Benintendi
    • Sinker (34% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 219 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (21% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 202 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 448 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (10% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 BM Braden Montgomery SH .298
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Braden Montgomery
    • Sinker (34% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (21% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (10% usage) projects to .274 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 BD Brenton Doyle RHB .295
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brenton Doyle
    • Sinker (34% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 242 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (21% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 425 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (10% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 8 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.