PITCHER MATCHUP

Taj Bradley vs St. Louis Cardinals

How the St. Louis Cardinals'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 .318vs RHH xwOBA .306Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 43%Cutter 23%Splitter 18%Curveball 11%Sinker 3%Unknown 1%

How the St. Louis Cardinals's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .316
  1. 1 JW Jordan Walker RHB .337
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 318 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 79 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .347 xwOBA over 29 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 235 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 AB Alec Burleson LHB .346
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 532 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .353 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 130 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .372 xwOBA over 277 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 IH Iván Herrera RHB .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 397 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .341 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .319 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 93 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .343 xwOBA over 285 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  4. 4 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .357 xwOBA over 187 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 38 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .299 xwOBA over 16 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 542 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 114 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .281 xwOBA over 51 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 96 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .339 xwOBA over 280 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .294
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .277 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 21 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 73 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .294
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .278 xwOBA over 153 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .311 xwOBA over 7 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .289 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 110 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 NG Nolan Gorman LHB .317
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nolan Gorman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 365 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .297 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  9. 9 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .302
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 206 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 160 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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