PITCHER MATCHUP

Noah Schultz vs Texas Rangers

How the Texas Rangers's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Noah Schultz's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Noah Schultz's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .386vs RHH xwOBA .368Seasons 2026
Sinker 25%Four-Seam Fastball 24%Sweeper 22%Cutter 20%Changeup 10%

How the Texas Rangers's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Texas Rangers's top-9-by-AB hitters against Noah Schultz, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .320
  1. 1 BN Brandon Nimmo LHB .341
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brandon Nimmo
    • Sinker (25% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 262 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (24% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 580 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (22% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 146 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 JB Jake Burger RHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jake Burger
    • Sinker (25% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 284 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (24% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 299 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (22% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JJ Josh Jung RHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Josh Jung
    • Sinker (25% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 231 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (24% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (22% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 105 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 ED Ezequiel Duran RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ezequiel Duran
    • Sinker (25% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 146 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (24% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 219 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (22% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 JP Joc Pederson LHB .350
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Joc Pederson
    • Sinker (25% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (24% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 320 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (22% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 154 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 EC Evan Carter LHB .302
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Evan Carter
    • Sinker (25% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (24% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 232 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (22% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 WL Wyatt Langford RHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Wyatt Langford
    • Sinker (25% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 287 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (24% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 386 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (22% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 99 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .253 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  8. 8 AO Alejandro Osuna LHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alejandro Osuna
    • Sinker (25% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (24% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (22% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 KH Kyle Higashioka RHB .302
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kyle Higashioka
    • Sinker (25% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 173 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (24% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 195 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (22% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (20% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (10% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-07-21 game page →