PITCHER MATCHUP

Nathan Eovaldi vs Seattle Mariners

How the Seattle Mariners's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Nathan Eovaldi's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Nathan Eovaldi's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .312vs RHH xwOBA .277Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Splitter 34%Four-Seam Fastball 21%Curveball 20%Cutter 19%Sinker 6%Slider 1%

How the Seattle Mariners's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Seattle Mariners's top-9-by-AB hitters against Nathan Eovaldi, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .320
  1. 1 JN Josh Naylor LHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Josh Naylor
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 477 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 281 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 CY Cole Young LHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Cole Young
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 236 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 JR Julio Rodríguez RHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Julio Rodríguez
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 434 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 375 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 RA Randy Arozarena RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Randy Arozarena
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 523 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 331 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 JC J.P. Crawford LHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. J.P. Crawford
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 504 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 264 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 CR Cal Raleigh SH .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Cal Raleigh
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 574 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .448 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  7. 7 LR Luke Raley LHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Luke Raley
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .371 xwOBA over 265 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .378 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  8. 8 DC Dominic Canzone LHB .355
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dominic Canzone
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .402 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .397 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 CE Colt Emerson LHB .298
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Colt Emerson
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 16 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (6% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-07-25 game page →