PITCHER MATCHUP

Landen Roupp vs St. Louis Cardinals

How the St. Louis Cardinals's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Landen Roupp's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Landen Roupp's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .322vs RHH xwOBA .287Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 37%Curveball 30%Changeup 19%Cutter 11%Four-Seam Fastball 4%

How the St. Louis Cardinals's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the St. Louis Cardinals's top-9-by-AB hitters against Landen Roupp, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .308
  1. 1 JW Jordan Walker RHB .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 235 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (30% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 318 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  2. 2 AB Alec Burleson LHB .337
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .373 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (30% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 232 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 532 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 IH Iván Herrera RHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 285 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (30% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 397 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (30% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 187 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 280 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (30% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 542 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (30% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .302
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (30% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 NG Nolan Gorman LHB .297
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nolan Gorman
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (30% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .236 xwOBA over 160 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 365 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .293
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 160 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (30% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (4% usage) projects to .237 xwOBA over 206 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

No meeting currently scheduled — this is a durable season matchup read.