PITCHER MATCHUP

Ryan Gusto vs Chicago Cubs

How the Chicago Cubs's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Ryan Gusto's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Ryan Gusto's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .366vs RHH xwOBA .305Seasons 2026–2025
Four-Seam Fastball 36%Curveball 12%Sweeper 12%Cutter 12%Changeup 12%Sinker 11%Slider 6%

How the Chicago Cubs's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Chicago Cubs's top-9-by-AB hitters against Ryan Gusto, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .322
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 594 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (12% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 448 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 267 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 526 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .371 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (12% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 221 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 AB Alex Bregman RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 566 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (12% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 428 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 266 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MB Michael Busch LHB .335
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 612 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (12% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 212 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 242 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 245 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 IH Ian Happ SH .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 628 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (12% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 330 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .374 xwOBA over 226 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 203 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .336
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .372 xwOBA over 496 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 166 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (12% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 151 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .381 xwOBA over 370 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 305 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 493 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (12% usage) projects to .373 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 170 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 316 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 271 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .305
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 345 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (12% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 234 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 183 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  9. 9 MC Michael Conforto LHB .326
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Conforto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (36% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 451 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (12% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (12% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (12% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (12% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 182 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (11% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 176 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (6% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 138 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.