PITCHER MATCHUP

Mitch Bratt vs Cincinnati Reds

How the Cincinnati Reds'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 .283vs RHH xwOBA .315Seasons 2026
Four-Seam Fastball 44%SV 22%Slider 11%Changeup 10%Sinker 8%Curveball 4%Unknown 1%

How the Cincinnati Reds's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .320
  1. 1 SS Sal Stewart RHB .351
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Sal Stewart
    • Four-Seam Fastball (44% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .382 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Slider (11% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 124 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 ED Elly De La Cruz SH .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Elly De La Cruz
    • Four-Seam Fastball (44% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 589 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (11% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 207 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 288 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 193 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .245 xwOBA over 159 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  3. 3 JB JJ Bleday LHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Bleday
    • Four-Seam Fastball (44% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 421 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (11% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 185 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .375 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 ES Eugenio Suárez RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Eugenio Suárez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (44% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 519 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (11% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 285 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 132 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 317 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MM Matt McLain RHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Matt McLain
    • Four-Seam Fastball (44% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 261 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (11% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 189 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 191 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  6. 6 TS Tyler Stephenson RHB .336
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Tyler Stephenson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (44% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 351 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (11% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 178 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 284 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 TF TJ Friedl LHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. TJ Friedl
    • Four-Seam Fastball (44% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 453 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (11% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 220 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .252 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  8. 8 DM Dane Myers RHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dane Myers
    • Four-Seam Fastball (44% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 223 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Slider (11% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 KH Ke'Bryan Hayes RHB .297
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ke'Bryan Hayes
    • Four-Seam Fastball (44% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 288 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (22% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Slider (11% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 267 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (4% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-08-23 game page →