PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs Tampa Bay Rays

How the Tampa Bay Rays'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 Tampa Bay Rays's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .307
  1. 1 JC Junior Caminero RHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Junior Caminero
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .394 xwOBA over 312 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 348 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 235 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 165 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 9 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  2. 2 YD Yandy Díaz RHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Yandy Díaz
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 505 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 452 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 174 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 191 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  3. 3 JA Jonathan Aranda LHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jonathan Aranda
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 422 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 212 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 66 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .370 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 CS Chandler Simpson LHB .295
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Chandler Simpson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 381 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .259 xwOBA over 229 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .288 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 .288 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 LH Liam Hicks LHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Liam Hicks
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 333 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 167 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • 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).
  6. 6 CM Cedric Mullins LHB .290
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Cedric Mullins
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 520 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 219 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 119 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .254 xwOBA over 173 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .249 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 TW Taylor Walls SH .280
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Taylor Walls
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 394 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .235 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .262 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  8. 8 JD Jonny DeLuca RHB .290
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jonny DeLuca
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .273 xwOBA over 212 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 150 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 66 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 137 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .260 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 RP Richie Palacios LHB .309
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Richie Palacios
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 266 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 136 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • 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).
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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