PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs Toronto Blue Jays

How the Toronto Blue Jays'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 .355vs RHH xwOBA .319Seasons 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 Toronto Blue Jays's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Toronto Blue Jays'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 EC Ernie Clement SH .289
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ernie Clement
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 378 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 289 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 233 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 140 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  2. 2 KO Kazuma Okamoto RHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kazuma Okamoto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 140 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 1 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% 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).
  3. 3 VG Vladimir Guerrero Jr. RHB .345
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Vladimir Guerrero Jr.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .385 xwOBA over 425 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 430 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 170 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 206 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 252 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 150 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .361 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 AG Andrés Giménez LHB .296
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Andrés Giménez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 423 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 217 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 199 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 GS George Springer RHB .334
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. George Springer
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .376 xwOBA over 416 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 350 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 151 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 249 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 NL Nathan Lukes LHB .304
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Lukes
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 284 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .311 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 .318 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 JS Jesús Sánchez LHB .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jesús Sánchez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 402 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 157 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 160 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  8. 8 MS Myles Straw RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Myles Straw
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 170 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .285 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 .263 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 BV Brandon Valenzuela SH .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brandon Valenzuela
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .305 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 .310 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (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: 2026-08-25 game page →