PITCHER MATCHUP

Seth Lugo vs Minnesota Twins

How the Minnesota Twins'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 .355vs RHH xwOBA .325Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 20%Sinker 18%Curveball 16%Cutter 14%Changeup 9%Slider 8%SV 7%Sweeper 6%CS 3%Splitter 1%

How the Minnesota Twins's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Minnesota Twins'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 JB Josh Bell SH .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Josh Bell
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 488 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 195 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 265 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 171 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 2 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 73 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).
  2. 2 BL Brooks Lee SH .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brooks Lee
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 352 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 82 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .267 xwOBA over 186 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  3. 3 KC Kody Clemens SH .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kody Clemens
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 338 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 132 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 48 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 84 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  4. 4 LK Luke Keaschall RHB .310
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Luke Keaschall
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .268 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 BB Byron Buxton RHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Byron Buxton
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 378 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 235 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 141 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .344 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 TL Trevor Larnach LHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Trevor Larnach
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 440 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 173 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 161 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 155 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over limited BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  7. 7 RL Royce Lewis RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Royce Lewis
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 268 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .355 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 97 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 117 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 158 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  8. 8 AM Austin Martin RHB .313
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Austin Martin
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .346 xwOBA over 269 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .364 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 61 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 1 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 44 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).
  9. 9 VC Victor Caratini SH .326
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Victor Caratini
    • Four-Seam Fastball (20% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 346 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 47 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .385 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 99 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (7% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
    • Sweeper (6% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .322 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: 2026-07-28 game page →