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 .357vs RHH xwOBA .314Seasons 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 .311
  1. 1 WA Wilyer Abreu LHB .339
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Wilyer Abreu
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 487 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .378 xwOBA over 194 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 204 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 176 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .348 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 .326
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jarren Duran
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 636 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .369 xwOBA over 234 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .358 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 220 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 275 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 103 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 CD Caleb Durbin RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Caleb Durbin
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 301 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 255 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .275 xwOBA over 133 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • 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 AR Adley Rutschman SH .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Adley Rutschman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 444 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 167 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 231 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 7 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).
  5. 5 AM Andruw Monasterio RHB .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Andruw Monasterio
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .263 xwOBA over 33 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 .259 xwOBA over limited BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 TS Trevor Story RHB .304
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Trevor Story
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 299 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .288 xwOBA over 53 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 166 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 8 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).
  7. 7 CW Connor Wong RHB .294
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Connor Wong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 252 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 179 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .276 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .268 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 EW Eli White RHB .307
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Eli White
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 NS Nick Sogard SH .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nick Sogard
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 134 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 12 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .308 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 .308 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 →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-09-11 game page →