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 .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 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 BL Brooks Lee SH .300
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brooks Lee
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 404 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 196 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 98 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .261 xwOBA over 224 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 167 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  2. 2 JB Josh Bell SH .326
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Josh Bell
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .360 xwOBA over 550 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 235 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 139 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .287 xwOBA over 295 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 3 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .362 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 KC Kody Clemens SH .320
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Kody Clemens
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 396 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 181 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 70 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 109 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 105 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 60 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .306 xwOBA over 4 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 LK Luke Keaschall RHB .314
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Luke Keaschall
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .332 xwOBA over 232 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 170 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 44 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .260 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .334 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 .334 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  5. 5 RL Royce Lewis RHB .318
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Royce Lewis
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 319 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 191 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 138 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 200 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 113 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .295 xwOBA over 4 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • CS (3% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  6. 6 TL Trevor Larnach LHB .329
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Trevor Larnach
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 478 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 188 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 80 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 175 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 163 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 3 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).
  7. 7 BB Byron Buxton RHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Byron Buxton
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 387 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 243 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 65 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 112 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 149 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 185 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 116 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% 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).
    • 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).
  8. 8 VC Victor Caratini SH .318
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Victor Caratini
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 374 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .300 xwOBA over 135 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 53 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .391 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .312 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 .312 xwOBA over limited BIP — a roughly even matchup (zone profile imputed from overall vs-handedness wOBA — limited per-pitch-type data).
  9. 9 RJ Ryan Jeffers RHB .319
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ryan Jeffers
    • Four-Seam Fastball (19% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 406 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (18% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 260 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (16% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 54 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (14% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Changeup (9% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Slider (8% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 190 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sweeper (7% usage) projects to .269 xwOBA over 101 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • SV (6% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 9 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).
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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