PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs New York Mets

How the New York Mets'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 New York Mets's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .328
  1. 1 BB Bo Bichette RHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bo Bichette
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 371 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 352 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 146 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 291 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 150 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 9 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).
  2. 2 CB Carson Benge LHB .331
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Benge
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 198 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 105 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • 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).
  3. 3 MS Marcus Semien RHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Marcus Semien
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 534 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 351 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 145 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .242 xwOBA over 298 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  4. 4 AE A.J. Ewing LHB .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. A.J. Ewing
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • 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 BB Brett Baty LHB .326
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brett Baty
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 382 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .249 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 FL Francisco Lindor SH .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Francisco Lindor
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over 638 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .371 xwOBA over 224 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 148 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 154 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 250 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 224 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 JS Juan Soto LHB .386
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Juan Soto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .449 xwOBA over 484 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .393 xwOBA over 366 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 124 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .390 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 217 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 262 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .455 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 FA Francisco Alvarez RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Francisco Alvarez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 262 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 204 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 178 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 3 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).
  9. 9 JY Jared Young LHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jared Young
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 24 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • 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).
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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