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 .334vs RHH xwOBA .296Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 32%FO 27%Cutter 21%Sweeper 9%Sinker 6%Slider 4%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 .331
  1. 1 AB Alex Bregman RHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 467 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (9% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 351 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 218 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 491 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • 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 (21% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (9% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 359 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 229 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 405 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (9% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 167 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 178 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 IH Ian Happ SH .355
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 535 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (9% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .378 xwOBA over 191 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 172 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 MB Michael Busch LHB .358
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 499 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .374 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (9% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 198 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 197 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .340
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 437 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 (21% usage) projects to .368 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (9% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 281 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over 241 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  7. 7 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .340
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over 393 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 124 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .381 xwOBA over 297 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .257 xwOBA over 259 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 286 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .233 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  9. 9 MB Moisés Ballesteros LHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Moisés Ballesteros
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • FO (27% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (21% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (9% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-06-22 game page →