PITCHER MATCHUP

Michael McGreevy vs Chicago Cubs

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

Michael McGreevy's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .373vs RHH xwOBA .308Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 25%Sinker 19%Changeup 16%Sweeper 14%Curveball 12%Cutter 11%Slider 3%

How the Chicago Cubs's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .316
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (25% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 526 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 388 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (3% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 246 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 AB Alex Bregman RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (25% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 501 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 376 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (3% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 240 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (25% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 448 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 183 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (3% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 192 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MB Michael Busch LHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (25% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 543 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .369 xwOBA over 211 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 105 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (3% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 213 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 IH Ian Happ SH .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (25% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 575 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .378 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 289 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (3% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 183 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (25% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 465 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .369 xwOBA over 300 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 124 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (3% usage) projects to .230 xwOBA over 257 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  7. 7 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (25% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 436 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .403 xwOBA over 315 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 132 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (3% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 272 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (25% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 304 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (3% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 MC Michael Conforto LHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Conforto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (25% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 411 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (19% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .242 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (14% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (11% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (3% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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