MLB Power Rankings — Week 26, 2026
As of 2026-09-23
latest is Week 27, 2026
| # | Team | Rec | Rating | Inj | Earl's Take |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Δ – | 99-59 | +1.1 | -0.2 | Milwaukee sits at No. 1 with a 1.119 runs-neutral rating, but that number has slid 0.231 in a week and already bakes in a 0.17 dock for the Woodruff and bullpen absences. The 98-59 record and 0.29 vs-market edge say the market has been slow to fully price this team, so I'm a buyer on Milwaukee laying anything under a run and a half. |
| 2 | Δ – | 87-71 | +0.9 | -0.2 | Chicago sits at No. 2 with a 1.082 runs-neutral rating, but that number has slid 0.188 in a week and already bakes in a 0.23 dock for a bullpen missing Ben Brown, Trent Thornton, and Phil Maton. The 87-69 record and 0.77 vs-market mark say this team has been slightly better than the price all year, so the recent dip looks like a buy-low window rather than a real collapse. At roughly a -1.1 run favorite on a neutral field, they're still priced like an elite club, so I'd only lay the number if the relief corps stabilizes. |
| 3 | Δ ▲1 | 97-60 | +0.8 | -0.3 | The Dodgers rate at 0.708 runs better than an average team on a neutral field, third in the league, but that's down 0.072 from last week and well below their 1.404 prior-season mark, with a soft -0.042 schedule doing them no favors. Their market price sits 0.92 runs above this rating, meaning the public is paying a hefty premium for the brand name, so this is a clear sell-high spot until the bats and bullpen stabilize. The 0.32-run injury dock for Edgardo Henriquez, Dalton Rushing, and Will Klein is real but modest, so the bigger concern is the trajectory, not the absences. |
| 4 | Δ ▼1 | 91-67 | +0.5 | -0.4 | The Yankees sit at a 0.488 neutral-field rating, but that's down a massive 0.379 from last week and a steep fall from their 1.239 prior-season mark, so this is a clear sell-high signal on reputation. Their -0.1 vs. market edge suggests the public is still pricing them near their old form, but with Ryan Weathers, Trent Grisham, and Fernando Cruz all unavailable and a 0.38 injury dock already baked in, the market is giving you no value on a team that's barely above average right now. |
| 5 | Δ ▲3 | 96-62 | +0.4 | -0.2 | Tampa Bay sits at No. 5 with a plus-0.377 run rating on a neutral field, but that number has slid 0.122 in a week and already absorbs a 0.24 dock for McClanahan, Cleavinger, and Wells being out. At plus-0.04 versus the market, this is a slight sell — the rating is trending the wrong way and the pitching losses are real, so I'd want a better number before backing them. |
| 6 | Δ ▲4 | 87-70 | +0.3 | -0.3 | San Diego sits at 87-69 with a plus-0.37 run rating on a neutral field, a modest edge that's been nearly flat week-over-week (plus-0.002) and is weighed down by a minus-0.034 strength of schedule. The market's plus-0.42 against them suggests San Diego is slightly underrated relative to their true talent, but the 0.35-run injury dock for Gavin Sheets, Miguel Andujar, and Luis Rengifo is real and eats into that margin. At this rating, they're a fair-weather buy only in spots where the number drifts past a field-goal-sized edge. |
| 7 | Δ ▲6 | 81-77 | +0.2 | -0.1 | The White Sox rate at +0.18 runs better than an average team on a neutral field, up 0.078 from last week, and their 80-76 record against a slightly negative schedule (-0.032) makes them a quiet buy at 8th overall. The market is already catching on though, given their 0.81 vs-market mark, so the edge is thinner than the raw rating suggests. With Joey Bart and Tanner Murray both out and 0.09 runs already docked for those absences, this team is closer to fairly priced than a bargain. |
| 8 | Δ ▼1 | 87-71 | +0.2 | -0.3 | Philadelphia sits at 7th with a plus-0.201 runs rating on a neutral field, but that number has cratered 0.327 in a week and already bakes in a 0.32-run dock for missing Jesús Luzardo, Brad Keller, and Adolis García. The market is pricing the Phillies 0.48 runs better than this rating implies, which screams overrated — that gap is roughly half a run of free value for anyone selling Philadelphia. With a soft 0.045 strength of schedule flattering an 87-70 record, I'm fading this team until the injury ledger clears. |
| 9 | Δ – | 93-65 | +0.1 | -0.4 | Atlanta sits at a 0.124 rating (9th), but that mark has cratered by 0.371 in a week and already bakes in a 0.41-run dock for missing starters Bryce Elder, Reynaldo López, and Lane Thomas. The market is pricing them 0.18 runs worse than my number, so this is a clear buy-low on a 92-win team whose true talent still clears the average club by a hair. |
| 10 | Δ ▼5 | 85-73 | +0.1 | -0.4 | Boston sits at 10th with a plus-0.099 run rating on a neutral field, but that number has cratered 0.541 in a week and carries a 0.36-run dock for three injured regulars in Rafaela, Yoshida, and Seigler. The market is pricing them 0.23 runs worse than my number, so there's a sliver of value, but a 0.921 prior-season rating bleeding down to 0.099 is a clear sell signal, not a buy. At this rating they're roughly a quarter-run favorite against an average team, so anything approaching a full-run spread is a fade. |
| 11 | Δ ▲4 | 83-74 | +0.0 | -0.1 | Arizona sits at 11th with a near-neutral rating of -0.034 runs on a neutral field, but that number is sliding fast, down 0.084 in a week, and it already bakes in a 0.09 dock for losing Ryan Thompson and Tyler Locklear. The 82-74 record and prior-season rating of 0.349 flatter this team, while a 0.45 mark against the market says the public keeps overpaying for the name. Sell Arizona at current prices; this is a below-average club being priced like a contender. |
| 12 | Δ ▼6 | 74-85 | -0.1 | -0.5 | Detroit sits at 12th with a -0.047 runs-neutral rating, but that number is already docked 0.51 runs for injuries and has cratered 0.582 versus last week, so the market is catching up to a fading roster rather than sleeping on it. The absences of Flaherty, Melton, and Keith are material, and with a 74-84 record and a -0.108 schedule strength, this is a sell — the -0.047 rating implies a near pick'em against an average team, which overprices a club missing two starters and a bat. |
| 13 | Δ ▼1 | 72-85 | -0.1 | -0.4 | The Mets grade out at -0.178 runs versus an average team on a neutral field, ranked 14th, and that number has cratered by 0.331 over the past week — the market's +0.14 vs. their rating suggests they're being priced slightly better than they actually are. With a 71-85 record and 0.39 runs already docked for absences including Christian Scott and Jorge Polanco, this is a sell: the rating sits below .500-team territory, so any spread near pick'em is a gift to the other side. |
| 14 | Δ ▲4 | 82-76 | -0.2 | -0.2 | Cleveland sits at 15th with a neutral-field rating of -0.196 runs, meaning they grade slightly below average, and that number has slid 0.138 over the past week. The 0.23-run dock for missing Rhys Hoskins plus relievers Colin Holderman and Shawn Armstrong is material, and their -0.14 mark versus the market says the public is pricing them a touch better than the numbers justify. At 82-75 with a soft -0.096 strength of schedule, this is a slight sell: the market is shading them toward average while the underlying rating says they're a hair below it. |
| 15 | Δ ▲4 | 75-84 | -0.2 | -0.3 | Washington sits at 16th with a -0.287 runs-neutral rating, a steep -0.211 drop from last week that signals real deterioration rather than noise. The 74-84 record and -1.746 prior-season rating confirm this is a below-average club, and the 0.84 vs-market mark suggests the number is already shaded against them. With three key arms and a catcher on the 60-day IL, I'm selling Washington at any price that treats them as a neutral or better team. |
| 16 | Δ – | 78-80 | -0.2 | -0.3 | Miami sits at 18th with a -0.41 runs-neutral rating, meaning they're a below-average team priced only slightly worse than a coin-flip on a neutral field. The rating has cratered 0.446 runs in a week, and with Max Meyer plus relievers Pete Fairbanks and Anthony Bender all on the 15-day IL, this club is a clear sell. The 0.27 vs-market edge suggests the number is shading their way, so I'd be looking to fade Miami rather than back them. |
| 17 | Δ ▼6 | 80-78 | -0.2 | -0.5 | Pittsburgh sits at 13th with a -0.158 runs-neutral rating, but that number is sliding fast after a -0.315 drop from last week, and the 0.45-point injury dock for losing Mitch Keller, Braxton Ashcraft, and Endy Rodríguez is fully baked in. Their 80-77 record is doing a lot of heavy lifting for a team whose underlying rating is barely below average, which makes them a sell in any market still pricing them as a .500-ish club. The 0.14 edge versus the market suggests the number is already shaded their way, so there's no value left on the Pittsburgh side. |
| 18 | Δ ▼4 | 77-82 | -0.4 | -0.3 | Toronto sits at 17th with a -0.343 run rating on a neutral field, and that number is sliding hard — down 0.395 versus last week, the sharpest decline on the board. The rotation is gutted with Corbin and Bieber both out, and the 0.26 injury dock already baked in may not fully capture that loss. At 77-80 and rated 0.13 runs worse than market, this is a clear sell — the public is pricing them closer to their 0.736 prior-season rating than to what they actually are right now. |
| 19 | Δ ▼2 | 78-81 | -0.5 | -0.5 | Baltimore sits at 19th with a -0.515 runs-neutral rating, meaning they're roughly half a run worse than an average team on a neutral field, and that number has cratered by nearly half a run (-0.494) in just the last week. The 0.46-point injury dock for Kyle Bradish, Jackson Holliday, and Blaze Alexander is material and baked into that rating, so this is a clear sell-low or fade spot rather than a buy. At -0.09 versus the market, there's no edge either way, but the sharp move here is to keep fading Baltimore until the rating stabilizes. |
| 20 | Δ – | 77-81 | -0.5 | -0.2 | St. Louis sits at 20th with a -0.54 run rating on a neutral field, and that number has cratered by 0.422 in the last week alone — a clear sell signal given they're 76-81 and already docked 0.24 runs for missing Hunter Dobbins, Blaze Jordan, and Peter Strzelecki. The +0.31 vs-market mark is the only thing keeping this from being a pure fade, but a sub-.500 team shedding nearly half a run of rating in seven days is one the market hasn't fully priced yet. |
| 21 | Δ ▲2 | 78-79 | -0.7 | -0.3 | Houston sits at 23rd with a -0.824 runs-neutral rating, meaning they'd be roughly 0.8-run underdogs to an average team on a neutral field, and that number has slid another 0.453 over the past week. At 77-79 with a -0.52 vs-market mark, the market has already punished them, but the continued decline and a 0.34-run injury dock from losing Burrows and two relievers say the fall isn't finished. Sell Houston — the rating is trending the wrong way and the bullpen attrition makes them a fade in any matchup priced near a pick'em. |
| 22 | Δ ▲2 | 68-90 | -0.8 | -0.2 | Kansas City sits at 21st with a -0.755 runs-neutral rating, and that -0.284 weekly drop is the real story: this team is sliding toward the bottom tier, not stabilizing. The rotation is thinned by 60-day absences for Luinder Avila and Stephen Kolek plus a 15-day hit to Beck Way, and with a 67-89 record, the market's modest +0.3 vs-market lean looks like stale optimism. Sell KC — a -0.755 rating means they should be roughly a -0.75 run favorite on a neutral field, so any line pricing them as a true home favorite is an overlay on the opponent. |
| 23 | Δ ▲2 | 78-79 | -0.8 | -0.4 | Texas sits at 22nd with a minus-0.767 runs rating, and that number is sliding fast, down another 0.245 in a week. They're a clear sell: a 78-78 record propped up by a soft minus-0.203 schedule, and the market's minus-0.43 against them suggests books still shade this team higher than the underlying numbers justify. With Leiter and Quantrill both on the 60-day IL and Higashioka out, the 0.4-run injury dock is real, so lay the price against Texas rather than backing the record. |
| 24 | Δ ▲2 | 75-84 | -0.9 | -0.4 | Minnesota sits at 25th with a -0.965 run rating, meaning they'd be roughly a -1 underdog to a league-average team on a neutral field, and that number is sliding fast at -0.229 week-over-week. The 73-84 record confirms the market has them priced about right, with a -0.34 vs-market mark suggesting no real edge either way. With Byron Buxton, Trevor Larnach, and Kaelen Culpepper all on the 10-day IL and a 0.37 injury dock already baked in, this is a clear sell-low or stay-away situation until the lineup gets healthier. |
| 25 | Δ ▼3 | 60-97 | -1.0 | -0.3 | At -0.963 runs on a neutral field, the Angels grade out as nearly a full run worse than an average team, and their rating has collapsed another 0.605 runs in just the last week. Sitting 60-96 with a -1.761 prior-season rating, this is a clear sell — the 24th-ranked profile is still too generous for a roster missing Schanuel, Moncada, and Natera. Against a typical -1.5 run line, this rating says they should be getting closer to +1.5 than laying anything. |
| 26 | Δ ▼5 | 65-94 | -1.2 | -0.7 | San Francisco sits at 26th with a -1.151 neutral-field rating, meaning they're roughly 1.15 runs worse than an average team, and that number has cratered by 0.865 in just a week. The 65-92 record confirms this is a genuinely bad club, not a market overreaction, and the losses of Logan Webb, Adrian Houser, and Willy Adames only deepen the hole. At just 0.22 runs better than the market prices them, there's no buy-low edge here — this is a clear sell or fade candidate until the rotation gets healthy. |
| 27 | Δ – | 73-84 | -1.4 | -0.4 | Seattle sits 27th with a minus-1.264 runs-neutral rating, down another 0.368 from last week, and a 73-83 record confirms this is a bottom-tier club. The market is already pricing them 1.41 runs worse than my number, so there's no value buying this sell — the injury dock of 0.43 for Emerson Hancock, Brendan Donovan, and Colt Emerson only deepens the hole. Fade Seattle as a favorite and look to play against them when the number looks short. |
| 28 | Δ – | 57-100 | -1.5 | -0.2 | Colorado sits 28th with a -1.439 runs-neutral rating, down another 0.365 this week, and that number already absorbs a 0.21 dock for Willi Castro, Tyler Freeman, and Sean Sullivan all being unavailable. At 57-99, this is a clear sell: a -1.439 rating means they'd be roughly +1.4 run underdogs to an average team on a neutral field, and a typical MLB spread sits near -1.5, so the market is pricing them about where they belong rather than offering any hidden value. The 0.7 vs-market mark is the only mild buy signal here, but the -0.365 weekly slide and a strength of schedule of just 0.148 say regression is coming from the wrong direction. |
| 29 | Δ – | 73-85 | -1.5 | -0.4 | Cincinnati sits 29th with a -1.565 runs-neutral rating, down another 0.413 this week, so this is a clear sell — they're roughly 1.6 runs worse than an average team before you even factor in the 0.214 strength-of-schedule bump. The market's -0.53 vs. their rating suggests they've been slightly overvalued, and with 0.43 runs docked for Chase Burns plus two relievers on the 15-day IL, there's no reason to back them at a short number. |
| 30 | Δ – | 62-95 | -2.5 | -0.6 | Oakland is the worst team in baseball by a wide margin, with a -2.537 neutral-field rating that sits dead last at rank 30 and has cratered another -0.796 in just the past week. The market is actually giving them slightly more credit than my number does, with a -0.87 vs-market gap, so there's no buy-low case here — this is a clear sell or fade. Losing Jacob Wilson and J.T. Ginn to 60-day IL stints only deepens a 61-95 roster that already grades out as a bottom-feeder. |
Rating is in points on a neutral field: a team's rating minus its opponent's approximates the spread. Rec is the team's W-L-T through this week. Δ Wk is movement vs last week. Inj is the rating points docked for key players ruled out/doubtful/questionable this week. SOS is the average rating of opponents faced, in points vs league average (negative = easier schedule). vs Mkt is Earl's rating minus the market's (from closing lines), placed on Earl's points scale — positive means Earl is higher on the team than the market. How Earl rates teams →