PITCHER MATCHUP

Ranger Suarez vs Miami Marlins

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

Ranger Suarez's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .296vs RHH xwOBA .288Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Sinker 27%Four-Seam Fastball 19%Cutter 18%Curveball 17%Changeup 16%Slider 4%

How the Miami Marlins's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .315
  1. 1 OL Otto Lopez RHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Otto Lopez
    • Sinker (27% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 346 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 396 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .220 xwOBA over 199 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 281 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 XE Xavier Edwards SH .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Xavier Edwards
    • Sinker (27% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 254 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 481 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 105 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 205 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 JM Jakob Marsee LHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jakob Marsee
    • Sinker (27% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 287 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JS Javier Sanoja RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Javier Sanoja
    • Sinker (27% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 233 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 HH Heriberto Hernández RHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Heriberto Hernández
    • Sinker (27% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 220 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .266 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 KS Kyle Stowers LHB .329
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kyle Stowers
    • Sinker (27% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 410 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 157 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JM Joe Mack LHB .305
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Joe Mack
    • Sinker (27% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 OC Owen Caissie LHB .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Owen Caissie
    • Sinker (27% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 GC Griffin Conine LHB .343
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Griffin Conine
    • Sinker (27% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 53 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .407 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (18% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (17% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (16% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (4% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 68 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.