PITCHER MATCHUP

Mitch Bratt vs Los Angeles Dodgers

How the Los Angeles Dodgers's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Mitch Bratt's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Mitch Bratt's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .279vs RHH xwOBA .320Seasons 2026
Four-Seam Fastball 48%SV 22%Changeup 10%Slider 9%Sinker 8%Curveball 4%Unknown 1%

How the Los Angeles Dodgers's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Los Angeles Dodgers's top-9-by-AB hitters against Mitch Bratt, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .325
  1. 1 FF Freddie Freeman LHB .340
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Freddie Freeman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 609 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 166 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 214 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 313 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 KT Kyle Tucker LHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kyle Tucker
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 506 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 167 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 201 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 MM Max Muncy LHB .360
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Max Muncy
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .389 xwOBA over 324 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 167 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .398 xwOBA over 145 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MB Mookie Betts RHB .339
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Mookie Betts
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 480 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 150 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 232 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .385 xwOBA over 315 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 TH Teoscar Hernández RHB .348
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Teoscar Hernández
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 410 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 279 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 292 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 TE Tommy Edman SH .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Tommy Edman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 259 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 DR Dalton Rushing LHB .304
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dalton Rushing
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  8. 8 AF Alex Freeland SH .290
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Freeland
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .190 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 HF Hunter Feduccia LHB .294
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Hunter Feduccia
    • Four-Seam Fastball (48% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .219 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (9% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 22 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.