PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs San Francisco Giants

How the San Francisco Giants'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 San Francisco Giants's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .309
  1. 1 JH Jung Hoo Lee LHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jung Hoo Lee
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 442 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  2. 2 WA Willy Adames RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Willy Adames
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 597 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 363 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 280 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  3. 3 BE Bryce Eldridge LHB .335
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bryce Eldridge
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .402 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .354 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 DG Drew Gilbert LHB .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Gilbert
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 168 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .334 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 .334 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 MM Marcelo Mayer LHB .296
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Marcelo Mayer
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .263 xwOBA over 53 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .261 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 .261 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 CK Christian Koss RHB .295
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Koss
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 17 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .275 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 .275 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 JC Jonah Cox RHB .297
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jonah Cox
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .228 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 .228 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  8. 8 DC Drew Cavanaugh LHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Cavanaugh
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .294 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 .294 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 OB Osleivis Basabe RHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Osleivis Basabe
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .326 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 .326 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.