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 .355vs RHH xwOBA .318Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 19%Sinker 18%Curveball 16%Cutter 14%Changeup 9%Slider 8%Sweeper 6%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 .317
  1. 1 RD Rafael Devers LHB .351
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Rafael Devers
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 610 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 305 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .406 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 200 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .385 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  2. 2 JH Jung Hoo Lee LHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jung Hoo Lee
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 418 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 215 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .339 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 .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bryce Eldridge
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .408 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 53 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .352 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 .352 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 .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Gilbert
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 40 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).
  5. 5 CK Christian Koss RHB .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Koss
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .284 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 .284 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 DC Drew Cavanaugh LHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Drew Cavanaugh
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 13 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .328 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 .328 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 OB Osleivis Basabe RHB .321
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Osleivis Basabe
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 18 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .351 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 .351 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 JC Jonah Cox RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jonah Cox
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 SW Shay Whitcomb RHB .297
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Shay Whitcomb
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 15 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 17 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .218 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 .218 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.