PITCHER MATCHUP

Peter Lambert vs Tampa Bay Rays

How the Tampa Bay Rays'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 .300vs RHH xwOBA .309Seasons 2026–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 31%Changeup 23%Slider 18%SV 9%Cutter 9%Sinker 9%Curveball 1%Sweeper 1%

How the Tampa Bay Rays's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .305
  1. 1 JC Junior Caminero RHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Junior Caminero
    • Four-Seam Fastball (31% usage) projects to .385 xwOBA over 247 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 184 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 274 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 YD Yandy Díaz RHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Yandy Díaz
    • Four-Seam Fastball (31% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 401 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 236 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 362 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 JA Jonathan Aranda LHB .338
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jonathan Aranda
    • Four-Seam Fastball (31% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 290 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 154 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 CS Chandler Simpson LHB .298
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Chandler Simpson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (31% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 272 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 145 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 CM Cedric Mullins LHB .290
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Cedric Mullins
    • Four-Seam Fastball (31% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 446 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 191 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 TW Taylor Walls SH .271
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Taylor Walls
    • Four-Seam Fastball (31% usage) projects to .259 xwOBA over 312 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .242 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  7. 7 NF Nick Fortes RHB .274
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nick Fortes
    • Four-Seam Fastball (31% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 211 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .239 xwOBA over 99 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 BW Ben Williamson RHB .295
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ben Williamson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (31% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 RP Richie Palacios LHB .318
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Richie Palacios
    • Four-Seam Fastball (31% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 199 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (23% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (18% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (9% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Cutter (9% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (9% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-07-05 game page →