PITCHER MATCHUP

Kumar Rocker vs Milwaukee Brewers

How the Milwaukee Brewers's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Kumar Rocker's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Kumar Rocker's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .369vs RHH xwOBA .307Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Slider 31%Sinker 29%Cutter 17%Four-Seam Fastball 15%Changeup 5%Curveball 2%

How the Milwaukee Brewers's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Milwaukee Brewers's top-9-by-AB hitters against Kumar Rocker, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .317
  1. 1 BT Brice Turang LHB .341
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brice Turang
    • Slider (31% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 251 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (29% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (17% usage) projects to .381 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 546 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 199 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 WC William Contreras RHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. William Contreras
    • Slider (31% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 308 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (29% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 383 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (17% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 490 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 157 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JC Jackson Chourio SH .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jackson Chourio
    • Slider (31% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 249 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (29% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 301 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (17% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 418 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JB Jake Bauers LHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jake Bauers
    • Slider (31% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (29% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 151 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (17% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 305 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 GM Garrett Mitchell LHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Garrett Mitchell
    • Slider (31% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (29% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (17% usage) projects to .369 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 236 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  6. 6 CY Christian Yelich LHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Yelich
    • Slider (31% usage) projects to .253 xwOBA over 189 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (29% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 219 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (17% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 151 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 385 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JO Joey Ortiz RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Joey Ortiz
    • Slider (31% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 215 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (29% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 290 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (17% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 405 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 SF Sal Frelick LHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Sal Frelick
    • Slider (31% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (29% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 268 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (17% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 512 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 DH David Hamilton LHB .298
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. David Hamilton
    • Slider (31% usage) projects to .265 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (29% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (17% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (15% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .265 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-08-30 game page →