PITCHER MATCHUP

Landen Roupp vs Detroit Tigers

How the Detroit Tigers'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 .321vs RHH xwOBA .281Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 37%Curveball 31%Changeup 18%Cutter 11%Four-Seam Fastball 3%

How the Detroit Tigers's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .314
  1. 1 KM Kevin McGonigle LHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kevin McGonigle
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 RG Riley Greene LHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Riley Greene
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 260 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .247 xwOBA over 263 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .384 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 532 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 DD Dillon Dingler RHB .318
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dillon Dingler
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 192 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 66 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .266 xwOBA over 275 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  4. 4 ST Spencer Torkelson RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Spencer Torkelson
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 292 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 409 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 CK Colt Keith LHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Colt Keith
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 185 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .217 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 133 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 391 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 ZM Zach McKinstry LHB .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Zach McKinstry
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 161 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 405 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  7. 7 GT Gleyber Torres RHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Gleyber Torres
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 284 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 133 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .384 xwOBA over 474 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  8. 8 HL Hao-Yu Lee RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Hao-Yu Lee
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 JO James Outman LHB .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. James Outman
    • Sinker (37% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (31% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (18% usage) projects to .213 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (3% usage) projects to .256 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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