PITCHER MATCHUP

Taj Bradley vs Milwaukee Brewers

How the Milwaukee Brewers'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 .319vs RHH xwOBA .307Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 43%Cutter 23%Splitter 19%Curveball 11%Sinker 3%Unknown 1%

How the Milwaukee Brewers's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .325
  1. 1 BT Brice Turang LHB .336
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Brice Turang
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 530 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .398 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .279 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .296 xwOBA over 118 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .349 xwOBA over 266 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 WC William Contreras RHB .332
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. William Contreras
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 473 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 146 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 57 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .292 xwOBA over 64 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .359 xwOBA over 374 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 JB Jake Bauers LHB .344
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jake Bauers
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 291 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .384 xwOBA over 58 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .283 xwOBA over 77 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 142 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 JC Jackson Chourio SH .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jackson Chourio
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 400 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 293 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 GM Garrett Mitchell LHB .336
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Garrett Mitchell
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 222 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .375 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 106 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 CY Christian Yelich LHB .338
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Christian Yelich
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .356 xwOBA over 374 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .328 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 213 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  7. 7 JO Joey Ortiz RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Joey Ortiz
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 388 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .272 xwOBA over 30 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .304 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 DH David Hamilton LHB .293
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. David Hamilton
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .294 xwOBA over 267 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 67 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 32 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 115 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 AV Andrew Vaughn RHB .336
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Andrew Vaughn
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .371 xwOBA over 363 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .322 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 72 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 220 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

Next scheduled meeting: 2026-08-08 game page →