PITCHER MATCHUP

Sean Newcomb vs Detroit Tigers

How the Detroit Tigers's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Sean Newcomb's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Sean Newcomb's arsenal

Throws LHPvs LHH xwOBA .303vs RHH xwOBA .312Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 35%SV 27%Sinker 21%Cutter 7%Curveball 5%Changeup 5%Unknown 1%

How the Detroit Tigers's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Detroit Tigers's top-9-by-AB hitters against Sean Newcomb, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .321
  1. 1 KM Kevin McGonigle LHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kevin McGonigle
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (27% 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 (21% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (5% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 DD Dillon Dingler RHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dillon Dingler
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 325 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (27% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (5% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  3. 3 ST Spencer Torkelson RHB .326
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Spencer Torkelson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 463 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (27% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 320 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 124 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (5% usage) projects to .265 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 160 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  4. 4 RG Riley Greene LHB .338
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Riley Greene
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 566 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (27% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 278 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (5% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .258 xwOBA over 279 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  5. 5 CK Colt Keith LHB .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Colt Keith
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 420 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (27% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 202 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (5% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 238 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  6. 6 ZM Zach McKinstry LHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Zach McKinstry
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 434 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (27% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 186 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (5% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 HL Hao-Yu Lee RHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Hao-Yu Lee
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (27% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (5% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 JB Javier Báez SH .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Javier Báez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 220 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (27% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 133 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 56 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (5% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
  9. 9 MC Max Clark LHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Max Clark
    • Four-Seam Fastball (35% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (27% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sinker (21% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (7% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (5% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (5% usage) projects to .301 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.