PITCHER MATCHUP

Kodai Senga vs Chicago Cubs

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

Kodai Senga's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .339vs RHH xwOBA .310Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 33%FO 27%Cutter 20%Sweeper 8%Sinker 5%Slider 5%Curveball 1%

How the Chicago Cubs's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .333
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 528 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 391 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 247 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 AB Alex Bregman RHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 503 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 380 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 242 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 451 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 185 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 192 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MB Michael Busch LHB .352
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 545 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • FO (27% 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).
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 211 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 214 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 IH Ian Happ SH .348
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 578 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 99 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .377 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 183 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  6. 6 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .345
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 466 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .390 xwOBA over 124 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 302 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .266 xwOBA over 260 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  7. 7 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .338
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 438 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .383 xwOBA over 317 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 273 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 305 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 206 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .245 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  9. 9 MC Michael Conforto LHB .334
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Conforto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (33% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 416 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .373 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (5% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 126 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.