PITCHER MATCHUP

Taj Bradley vs Chicago Cubs

How the Chicago Cubs'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 Chicago Cubs's regulars project

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

Lineup avg xwOBA .329
  1. 1 NH Nico Hoerner RHB .316
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Nico Hoerner
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .325 xwOBA over 594 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .309 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 40 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .298 xwOBA over 91 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .335 xwOBA over 448 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  2. 2 PC Pete Crow-Armstrong LHB .335
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Pete Crow-Armstrong
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .340 xwOBA over 526 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .305 xwOBA over 122 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 76 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .345 xwOBA over 126 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 221 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  3. 3 AB Alex Bregman RHB .315
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Alex Bregman
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 566 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .333 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .274 xwOBA over 75 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .338 xwOBA over 428 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  4. 4 MB Michael Busch LHB .337
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Busch
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .363 xwOBA over 612 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 147 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .285 xwOBA over 66 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .282 xwOBA over 125 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 242 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  5. 5 IH Ian Happ SH .334
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Ian Happ
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .331 xwOBA over 628 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .344 xwOBA over 143 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .316 xwOBA over 86 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .342 xwOBA over 131 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .373 xwOBA over 226 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  6. 6 SS Seiya Suzuki RHB .344
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Seiya Suzuki
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .374 xwOBA over 496 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .315 xwOBA over 128 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .330 xwOBA over 45 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .303 xwOBA over 111 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .370 xwOBA over 370 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  7. 7 DS Dansby Swanson RHB .335
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Dansby Swanson
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .350 xwOBA over 493 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .362 xwOBA over 129 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 34 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .271 xwOBA over 88 BIP — a clear edge for the pitcher.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .351 xwOBA over 316 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
  8. 8 CK Carson Kelly RHB .312
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Carson Kelly
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .312 xwOBA over 345 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .327 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .302 xwOBA over 17 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .301 xwOBA over 52 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .310 xwOBA over 234 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
  9. 9 MC Michael Conforto LHB .333
    Pitch-by-pitch projection vs. Michael Conforto
    • Four-Seam Fastball (43% usage) projects to .354 xwOBA over 451 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
    • Cutter (23% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 83 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Splitter (18% usage) projects to .320 xwOBA over 41 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Curveball (11% usage) projects to .290 xwOBA over 78 BIP — a roughly even matchup.
    • Sinker (3% usage) projects to .365 xwOBA over 176 BIP — a meaningful edge for the batter.
Full pitch-by-pitch breakdown, with pitch-zone heatmaps →

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