PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs Cleveland Guardians

How the Cleveland Guardians'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 .354vs RHH xwOBA .317Seasons 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 Cleveland Guardians's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Cleveland Guardians'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 JA Jo Adell RHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jo Adell
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 486 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 310 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 229 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  2. 2 BR Brayan Rocchio SH .302
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brayan Rocchio
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 409 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 215 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 3 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).
  3. 3 SK Steven Kwan LHB .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Steven Kwan
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 638 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 313 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 185 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 201 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .321 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).
  4. 4 CD Chase DeLauter LHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Chase DeLauter
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 31 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .364 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 JR José Ramírez SH .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Ramírez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 469 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 202 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 167 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 331 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 230 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • 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).
  6. 6 TB Travis Bazzana LHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Travis Bazzana
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .316 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 .316 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 NL Nathaniel Lowe LHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathaniel Lowe
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 563 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 245 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 146 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .259 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 7 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).
  8. 8 AM Angel Martínez SH .301
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Angel Martínez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 298 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .255 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 PB Patrick Bailey SH .308
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Patrick Bailey
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 396 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .251 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • 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).
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-08-30 game page →