PITCHER MATCHUP

Peter Lambert vs Miami Marlins

How the Miami Marlins's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Peter Lambert's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Peter Lambert's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .307vs RHH xwOBA .289Seasons 2026–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 32%Changeup 24%Slider 14%Cutter 10%SV 9%Sinker 8%Sweeper 3%

How the Miami Marlins's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Miami Marlins's top-9-by-AB hitters against Peter Lambert, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .317
  1. 1 OL Otto Lopez RHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Otto Lopez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 376 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .238 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (14% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 272 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (10% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .379 xwOBA over 322 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 JM Jakob Marsee LHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jakob Marsee
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 261 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (14% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (10% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 KS Kyle Stowers LHB .326
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kyle Stowers
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 380 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 150 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (14% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (10% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JS Javier Sanoja RHB .295
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Javier Sanoja
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 217 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (14% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (10% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .250 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 HH Heriberto Hernández RHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Heriberto Hernández
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 193 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (14% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (10% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 140 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 OC Owen Caissie LHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Owen Caissie
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (14% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (10% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JM Joe Mack LHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Joe Mack
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (14% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (10% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  8. 8 GC Griffin Conine LHB .343
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Griffin Conine
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (14% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (10% usage) projects to .382 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 AR Agustín Ramírez RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Agustín Ramírez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (32% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (24% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (14% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (10% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (8% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (3% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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