PITCHER MATCHUP

Taj Bradley vs Los Angeles Angels

How the Los Angeles Angels's current regulars (top 9 by at-bats) project against Taj Bradley's season-to-date arsenal — not the posted lineup for any single game.

Taj Bradley's arsenal

Throws RHPvs LHH xwOBA .313vs RHH xwOBA .306Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 43%Cutter 23%Splitter 18%Curveball 11%Sinker 4%Unknown 1%

How the Los Angeles Angels's regulars project

Projected expected wOBA for each of the Los Angeles Angels's top-9-by-AB hitters against Taj Bradley, by batting order. A season-to-date read — lower favors the pitcher.

Lineup avg xwOBA .326
  1. 1 JA Jo Adell RHB .335
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jo Adell
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 442 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 95 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 279 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 ZN Zach Neto RHB .341
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Zach Neto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 408 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .367 xwOBA over 104 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 92 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 307 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 NS Nolan Schanuel SH .326
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nolan Schanuel
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 501 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .326 xwOBA over 127 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 59 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 85 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 229 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 MT Mike Trout RHB .352
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Mike Trout
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .392 xwOBA over 413 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .337 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 28 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 36 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .389 xwOBA over 162 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 JS Jorge Soler RHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jorge Soler
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .336 xwOBA over 304 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .270 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 251 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  6. 6 OP Oswald Peraza RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Oswald Peraza
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 42 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 10 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 LO Logan O'Hoppe RHB .324
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Logan O'Hoppe
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 301 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 69 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 35 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 233 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 VG Vaughn Grissom RHB .311
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Vaughn Grissom
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 5 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 62 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 JL Josh Lowe LHB .323
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Josh Lowe
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 283 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 89 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 39 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-07-12 game page →