PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs Houston Astros

How the Houston Astros'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 .357vs RHH xwOBA .312Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 19%Sinker 18%Curveball 16%Cutter 14%Changeup 9%Slider 8%Sweeper 7%SV 6%CS 3%Splitter 1%

How the Houston Astros's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .318
  1. 1 CW Christian Walker RHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Walker
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 494 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 365 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 171 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 268 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 3 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).
  2. 2 YA Yordan Alvarez SH .393
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Yordan Alvarez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .422 xwOBA over 419 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .408 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .420 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .380 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .379 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .384 xwOBA over 182 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .437 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 IP Isaac Paredes RHB .304
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Isaac Paredes
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 486 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 352 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 160 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 224 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  4. 4 JA Jose Altuve RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jose Altuve
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 468 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 346 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 170 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 334 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 175 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 CS Cam Smith RHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Cam Smith
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 244 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 246 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 145 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 DV Daulton Varsho LHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Daulton Varsho
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 431 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 121 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 146 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 JP Jeremy Peña RHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jeremy Peña
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .380 xwOBA over 364 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 339 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .266 xwOBA over 300 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • 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).
  8. 8 YD Yainer Diaz RHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Yainer Diaz
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 311 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 266 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 99 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 172 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 283 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 CV Christian Vázquez RHB .284
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Vázquez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 274 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .265 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .256 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .256 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 →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-09-17 game page →