PITCHER MATCHUP

Parker Messick vs Texas Rangers

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

Parker Messick's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .265vs RHH xwOBA .281Seasons 2026–2025
Four-Seam Fastball 36%Changeup 23%Sinker 16%Curveball 11%Slider 8%Cutter 5%

How the Texas Rangers's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .313
  1. 1 BN Brandon Nimmo LHB .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brandon Nimmo
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 608 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (16% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 273 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 262 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (5% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 140 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 JB Jake Burger RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jake Burger
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 318 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (16% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 294 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 236 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (5% usage) projects to .368 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 ED Ezequiel Duran RHB .290
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ezequiel Duran
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 232 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (16% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 156 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (5% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JP Joc Pederson LHB .334
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Joc Pederson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 328 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 161 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (16% usage) projects to .380 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (5% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 EC Evan Carter LHB .289
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Evan Carter
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 243 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (16% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (5% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 WL Wyatt Langford RHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Wyatt Langford
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 412 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (16% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 296 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 226 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (5% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 CS Corey Seager LHB .359
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Corey Seager
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .375 xwOBA over 288 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (16% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 204 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 66 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 184 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (5% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  8. 8 NL Nicky Lopez LHB .280
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nicky Lopez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 178 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .266 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (16% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .252 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (5% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 66 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 JF Justin Foscue RHB .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Justin Foscue
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 53 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (16% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (5% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

No meeting currently scheduled — this is a durable season matchup read.