PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs Chicago Cubs

How the Chicago Cubs'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 .358vs 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 Chicago Cubs's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .314
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 594 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 448 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 267 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 9 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).
  2. 2 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .334
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 526 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 221 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .367 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 AB Alex Bregman RHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 566 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 428 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 266 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  4. 4 MB Michael Busch LHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 612 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 242 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 212 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 245 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 493 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 316 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .380 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 170 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 271 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 9 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).
  6. 6 PR Pedro Ramírez SH .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Ramírez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .262 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 .262 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 MA Miguel Amaya RHB .298
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Miguel Amaya
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 186 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • 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).
  8. 8 MS Matt Shaw RHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Matt Shaw
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 178 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 GA Gabriel Arias RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Gabriel Arias
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 211 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .386 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .299 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 .299 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 →

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