PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs San Diego Padres

How the San Diego Padres'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 San Diego Padres's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .319
  1. 1 FT Fernando Tatis Jr. RHB .344
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Fernando Tatis Jr.
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .385 xwOBA over 443 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 387 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 63 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 166 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 260 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .379 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 JM Jackson Merrill LHB .335
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jackson Merrill
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 498 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over 223 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 185 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 196 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 105 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  3. 3 MM Manny Machado RHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Manny Machado
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .379 xwOBA over 504 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 375 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 177 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 282 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 169 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 11 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).
  4. 4 XB Xander Bogaerts RHB .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Xander Bogaerts
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 416 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 346 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .368 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 183 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 155 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 GS Gavin Sheets LHB .327
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Gavin Sheets
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 452 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 203 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 184 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 TF Ty France RHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ty France
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 403 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 287 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 102 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 207 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 11 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • 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).
  7. 7 LR Luis Rengifo SH .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Luis Rengifo
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 368 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .265 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 68 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  8. 8 JC Jake Cronenworth LHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jake Cronenworth
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 514 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 262 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .246 xwOBA over 133 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 155 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 FF Freddy Fermin RHB .295
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Freddy Fermin
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 272 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 206 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .270 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.