PITCHER MATCHUP

Nathan Eovaldi vs San Diego Padres

How the San Diego Padres'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 .311vs RHH xwOBA .289Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Splitter 34%Four-Seam Fastball 21%Curveball 20%Cutter 19%Sinker 5%Slider 1%

How the San Diego Padres's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .310
  1. 1 FT Fernando Tatis Jr. RHB .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Fernando Tatis Jr.
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .388 xwOBA over 463 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .369 xwOBA over 402 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 JM Jackson Merrill LHB .337
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jackson Merrill
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 528 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .380 xwOBA over 227 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 MM Manny Machado RHB .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Manny Machado
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .385 xwOBA over 515 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 388 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 XB Xander Bogaerts RHB .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Xander Bogaerts
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 437 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 362 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 TF Ty France RHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ty France
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 425 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 296 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 JC Jake Cronenworth LHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jake Cronenworth
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 533 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .259 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 269 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 FF Freddy Fermin RHB .292
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Freddy Fermin
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 285 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 209 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 LC Luis Campusano RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Luis Campusano
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 SS Sung-Mun Song LHB .285
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Sung-Mun Song
    • Splitter (34% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Four-Seam Fastball (21% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (20% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (19% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (5% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 18 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.