PITCHER MATCHUP

J.T. Ginn vs Cincinnati Reds

How the Cincinnati Reds's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against J.T. Ginn's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

J.T. Ginn's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .348vs RHH xwOBA .253Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 41%Slider 20%Changeup 16%Cutter 15%Four-Seam Fastball 7%

How the Cincinnati Reds's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Cincinnati Reds's top-9-by-AB hitters against J.T. Ginn, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .314
  1. 1 SS Sal Stewart RHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Sal Stewart
    • Sinker (41% usage) projects to .368 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (20% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (7% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 ED Elly De La Cruz SH .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Elly De La Cruz
    • Sinker (41% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (20% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 199 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 275 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 140 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (7% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 575 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 JB JJ Bleday LHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Bleday
    • Sinker (41% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 173 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (20% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .231 xwOBA over 214 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (7% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 395 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 ES Eugenio Suárez RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Eugenio Suárez
    • Sinker (41% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 305 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (20% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 273 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 124 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (7% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 499 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MM Matt McLain RHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Matt McLain
    • Sinker (41% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (20% usage) projects to .266 xwOBA over 180 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .263 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (7% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 243 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 TS Tyler Stephenson RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Tyler Stephenson
    • Sinker (41% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (20% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 168 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .246 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (7% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 337 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  7. 7 NL Nathaniel Lowe LHB .305
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathaniel Lowe
    • Sinker (41% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 240 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (20% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (7% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 523 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  8. 8 TF TJ Friedl LHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. TJ Friedl
    • Sinker (41% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 219 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (20% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .222 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (7% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 449 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 NM Noelvi Marte RHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Noelvi Marte
    • Sinker (41% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (20% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 173 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (15% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (7% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-08-04 game page →