PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs Los Angeles Angels

How the Los Angeles Angels's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Seth Lugo's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Seth Lugo's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .354vs RHH xwOBA .321Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 19%Sinker 18%Curveball 16%Cutter 14%Changeup 9%Slider 8%SV 6%Sweeper 6%CS 3%Splitter 1%

How the Los Angeles Angels's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Los Angeles Angels's top-9-by-AB hitters against Seth Lugo, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .313
  1. 1 ZN Zach Neto RHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Zach Neto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 430 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 326 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .369 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 145 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 272 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  2. 2 MT Mike Trout RHB .342
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Mike Trout
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .381 xwOBA over 457 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .383 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  3. 3 NS Nolan Schanuel SH .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nolan Schanuel
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 529 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 244 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .253 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  4. 4 OP Oswald Peraza RHB .287
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Oswald Peraza
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .259 xwOBA over 53 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 VG Vaughn Grissom RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Vaughn Grissom
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% 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).
  6. 6 JL Josh Lowe LHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Josh Lowe
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 306 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 132 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 140 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 MB Moisés Ballesteros LHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Moisés Ballesteros
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  8. 8 WM Wade Meckler LHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Wade Meckler
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 DG Denzer Guzman RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Denzer Guzman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 17 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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