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 .317vs RHH xwOBA .305Seasons 2026–2025–2024
Four-Seam Fastball 43%Cutter 23%Splitter 19%Curveball 11%Sinker 4%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 .319
  1. 1 AB Alec Burleson LHB .351
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alec Burleson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .376 xwOBA over 478 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 120 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 81 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .366 xwOBA over 248 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  2. 2 JW Jordan Walker RHB .328
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Jordan Walker
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .324 xwOBA over 271 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 71 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .318 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 194 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 JW JJ Wetherholt LHB .330
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. JJ Wetherholt
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 144 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 33 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .291 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 90 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 IH Iván Herrera RHB .325
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Iván Herrera
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 333 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .334 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .321 xwOBA over 26 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .348 xwOBA over 240 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 MW Masyn Winn RHB .303
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Masyn Winn
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .317 xwOBA over 503 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .280 xwOBA over 107 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 49 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 87 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 259 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  6. 6 NC Nathan Church LHB .302
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nathan Church
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 94 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 19 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 14 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .307 xwOBA over 25 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 37 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  7. 7 JF José Fermín RHB .298
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. José Fermín
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .286 xwOBA over 108 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 27 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 6 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .293 xwOBA over 20 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .314 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  8. 8 PP Pedro Pagés RHB .299
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pedro Pagés
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .284 xwOBA over 189 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 55 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .313 xwOBA over 22 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .308 xwOBA over 50 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 152 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 LN Lars Nootbaar LHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Lars Nootbaar
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .361 xwOBA over 374 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .352 xwOBA over 74 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (19% usage) projects to .248 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .329 xwOBA over 46 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (4% usage) projects to .323 xwOBA over 225 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.