PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs Boston Red Sox

How the Boston Red Sox'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 Boston Red Sox's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .316
  1. 1 WA Wilyer Abreu LHB .341
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Wilyer Abreu
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 513 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .379 xwOBA over 203 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 210 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 180 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .347 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 JD Jarren Duran LHB .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jarren Duran
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 645 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .368 xwOBA over 239 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 186 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 230 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 279 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 16 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).
  3. 3 CR Ceddanne Rafaela RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ceddanne Rafaela
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 456 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 299 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 297 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • 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).
  4. 4 CD Caleb Durbin RHB .297
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Caleb Durbin
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 318 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 270 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • 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).
  5. 5 WC Willson Contreras RHB .340
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Willson Contreras
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .380 xwOBA over 454 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .387 xwOBA over 260 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 225 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 7 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).
  6. 6 AR Adley Rutschman SH .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Adley Rutschman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 464 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 176 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 241 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 151 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 AM Andruw Monasterio RHB .297
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Andruw Monasterio
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 100 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .264 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .256 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .252 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 CM Curtis Mead RHB .322
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Curtis Mead
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 195 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • 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).
  9. 9 MY Masataka Yoshida LHB .306
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masataka Yoshida
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 312 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 43 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • 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).
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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