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 .354vs RHH xwOBA .322Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 20%Sinker 17%Curveball 16%Cutter 14%Changeup 9%Slider 8%SV 7%Sweeper 5%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 .330
  1. 1 BB Bo Bichette RHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Bo Bichette
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 312 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (17% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 288 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 258 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (5% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • 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).
  2. 2 CB Carson Benge LHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Benge
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (17% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% 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).
    • Sweeper (5% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 25 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).
  3. 3 BB Brett Baty LHB .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brett Baty
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 321 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (17% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 103 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (5% usage) projects to .249 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  4. 4 JS Juan Soto LHB .386
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Juan Soto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .463 xwOBA over 445 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (17% usage) projects to .379 xwOBA over 335 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .382 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .374 xwOBA over 192 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 241 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 8 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (5% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .460 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 MV Mark Vientos RHB .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Mark Vientos
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 290 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (17% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 123 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 192 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (5% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 FA Francisco Alvarez RHB .318
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Francisco Alvarez
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .374 xwOBA over 215 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (17% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 150 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (5% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • 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 AE A.J. Ewing LHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. A.J. Ewing
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (17% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sweeper (5% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 23 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .366 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 LT Luis Torrens RHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Luis Torrens
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (17% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% 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).
    • Sweeper (5% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • 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).
  9. 9 FL Francisco Lindor SH .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Francisco Lindor
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .378 xwOBA over 530 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (17% usage) projects to .378 xwOBA over 184 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 208 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 192 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (5% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 66 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).
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-07-07 game page →