PITCHER MATCHUP

Michael Lorenzen vs Chicago Cubs

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

Michael Lorenzen's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .349vs RHH xwOBA .335Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 21%Sinker 19%Changeup 19%Cutter 13%Curveball 11%Slider 10%Sweeper 8%

How the Chicago Cubs's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .320
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 527 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 388 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (10% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 246 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 AB Alex Bregman RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 501 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 379 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .245 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (10% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 240 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  3. 3 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 449 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 184 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (10% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 192 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MB Michael Busch LHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 543 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 211 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 177 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (10% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 213 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 IH Ian Happ SH .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 575 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .380 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 289 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (10% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 183 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 99 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 466 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 301 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 124 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (10% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 257 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  7. 7 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 436 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .394 xwOBA over 316 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (10% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 272 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 304 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (10% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 MC Michael Conforto LHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Conforto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 412 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .371 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (19% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (13% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (10% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (8% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 68 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.