Pro Baseball Championship Series Matchup
Short Answer
The model assigns significantly lower odds to Seattle vs New York M for the 2026 Pro Baseball Championship Series matchup, at 14.5% compared to the market's 25.0%.
1. Market Behavior & Drivers
Based on the chart data for the "Pro Baseball Championship Series Matchup" market, the price action has been entirely static. The market opened at a 0.0% probability and has not deviated from this price across all 82 available data points. Consequently, the overall trend is perfectly sideways, with no significant movements, spikes, or drops to analyze. The lack of any price change means no specific events have influenced market activity.
The trading volume in this market is zero contracts. This complete absence of trading activity indicates a lack of market participation and conviction. Without any buy or sell orders, the price has not been challenged or validated by traders. The zero volume pattern suggests that, to date, there is no interest from market participants in speculating on this particular outcome, or the perceived probability is so low that no one has been willing to take a position.
Given the flat price action at 0.0%, no support or resistance levels have been established. The price is resting at its absolute floor. The chart suggests that the collective market sentiment assigns a negligible, near-zero probability to this specific matchup occurring in the 2026 Pro Baseball Championship Series. The combination of a static 0.0% price and zero trading volume reflects a dormant market with no belief in a positive resolution.
- Nine teams hold a consensus top-10 farm system for 2026.
- Several top-15 teams project substantial payroll space below CBT limits.
- Dodgers and Braves consistently achieved high trade surplus value (2022-2024).
- Juan Soto signed a record $765 million contract with the New York Mets.
Who Wins and Why
| Outcome | Market | Model | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| New York Y vs Los Angeles D | 13.2% | 8.3% | Market higher by 4.9pp |
| New York Y vs Atlanta | 4.9% | 3.3% | Market higher by 1.6pp |
| Seattle vs Los Angeles D | 7.9% | 5.2% | Market higher by 2.7pp |
| New York Y vs San Diego | 3.5% | 2.4% | Market higher by 1.1pp |
| Seattle vs New York M | 25.0% | 14.5% | Market higher by 10.5pp |
2. Price Chart
Historical Price (Probability)
Outcome probability
Date
3. Market Data
Contract Snapshot
This market resolves to "Yes" if a Pro Baseball Championship Series matchup between the New York Y and Los Angeles D is officially confirmed, with resolution occurring immediately upon their qualification rather than when the game is played. Otherwise, it resolves to "No." Outcomes are verified by ESPN and the Governing League (MLB.com). The market opened on March 3, 2026, and will close early if the matchup is confirmed, or by November 1, 2026, with payouts projected 5 minutes after closing.
Available Contracts
Market options and current pricing
| Outcome bucket | Yes (price) | No (price) | Last trade probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Seattle vs New York M | $0.01 | $1.00 | 25% |
| Texas vs Los Angeles D | $0.03 | $1.00 | 22% |
| Houston vs Los Angeles D | $0.02 | $1.00 | 19% |
| New York Y vs San Francisco | $0.01 | $1.00 | 14% |
| New York Y vs Los Angeles D | $0.12 | $0.90 | 13% |
| Baltimore vs Los Angeles D | $0.02 | $1.00 | 12% |
| Seattle vs Los Angeles D | $0.09 | $0.92 | 8% |
| Detroit vs Los Angeles D | $0.05 | $0.98 | 5% |
| Chicago WS vs Los Angeles D | $0.01 | $1.00 | 5% |
| Detroit vs San Francisco | $0.01 | $1.00 | 5% |
| New York Y vs Atlanta | $0.06 | $0.95 | 5% |
| New York Y vs Chicago C | $0.03 | $1.00 | 4% |
| Seattle vs San Diego | $0.02 | $1.00 | 4% |
| New York Y vs San Diego | $0.03 | $0.98 | 4% |
| Seattle vs Atlanta | $0.03 | $0.98 | 3% |
| New York Y vs Cincinnati | $0.03 | $0.99 | 3% |
| Detroit vs Atlanta | $0.02 | $1.00 | 2% |
| Kansas City vs Los Angeles D | $0.02 | $1.00 | 2% |
| Tampa Bay vs Los Angeles D | $0.02 | $1.00 | 2% |
| Minnesota vs Los Angeles D | $0.02 | $1.00 | 2% |
| Texas vs Washington | $0.01 | $1.00 | 1% |
| A's vs Arizona | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Atlanta | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Colorado | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Los Angeles D | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Miami | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Milwaukee | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs New York M | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Philadelphia | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Pittsburgh | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs San Diego | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs San Francisco | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs St. Louis | $0.10 | $1.00 | 0% |
| A's vs Washington | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Arizona | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Atlanta | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Colorado | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Miami | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Milwaukee | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs New York M | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Philadelphia | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Pittsburgh | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs San Diego | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs San Francisco | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Baltimore vs Washington | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Arizona | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Atlanta | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Cincinnati | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Colorado | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Los Angeles D | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Miami | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Milwaukee | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs New York M | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Philadelphia | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Pittsburgh | $0.04 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs San Diego | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs San Francisco | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs St. Louis | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Boston vs Washington | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Arizona | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Atlanta | $0.05 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Chicago C | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Colorado | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Miami | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Milwaukee | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs New York M | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Philadelphia | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Pittsburgh | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs San Diego | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs San Francisco | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs St. Louis | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Chicago WS vs Washington | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Arizona | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Atlanta | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Colorado | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Los Angeles D | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Miami | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Milwaukee | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs New York M | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Philadelphia | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Pittsburgh | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs San Diego | $0.11 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs San Francisco | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Cleveland vs Washington | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs Arizona | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs Colorado | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs Miami | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs Milwaukee | $0.16 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs New York M | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs Philadelphia | $0.03 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs Pittsburgh | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs San Diego | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Detroit vs Washington | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Arizona | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Atlanta | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Chicago C | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Colorado | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Miami | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Milwaukee | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs New York M | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Philadelphia | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Pittsburgh | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs San Diego | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs San Francisco | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Houston vs Washington | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Arizona | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Atlanta | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Colorado | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Miami | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Milwaukee | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs New York M | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Philadelphia | $0.04 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Pittsburgh | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs San Diego | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs San Francisco | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Kansas City vs Washington | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Arizona | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Atlanta | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Cincinnati | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Colorado | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Los Angeles D | $0.06 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Miami | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Milwaukee | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs New York M | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Philadelphia | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Pittsburgh | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs San Diego | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs San Francisco | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Los Angeles A vs Washington | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Arizona | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Atlanta | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Colorado | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Miami | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Milwaukee | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs New York M | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Philadelphia | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Pittsburgh | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs San Diego | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs San Francisco | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs St. Louis | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Minnesota vs Washington | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| New York Y vs Arizona | $0.03 | $1.00 | 0% |
| New York Y vs Colorado | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| New York Y vs Miami | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| New York Y vs Milwaukee | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| New York Y vs New York M | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| New York Y vs Philadelphia | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| New York Y vs Pittsburgh | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| New York Y vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| New York Y vs Washington | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs Arizona | $0.06 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs Chicago C | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs Colorado | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs Miami | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs Milwaukee | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs Philadelphia | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs Pittsburgh | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs San Francisco | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Seattle vs Washington | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Arizona | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Atlanta | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Cincinnati | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Colorado | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Miami | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Milwaukee | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs New York M | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Philadelphia | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Pittsburgh | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs San Diego | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs San Francisco | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Tampa Bay vs Washington | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs Arizona | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs Atlanta | $0.02 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs Cincinnati | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs Colorado | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs Miami | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs Milwaukee | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs New York M | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs Philadelphia | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs Pittsburgh | $0.08 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs San Diego | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs San Francisco | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Texas vs St. Louis | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Arizona | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Atlanta | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Chicago C | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Cincinnati | $0.07 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Colorado | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Los Angeles D | $0.03 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Miami | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Milwaukee | $0.09 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs New York M | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Philadelphia | $0.03 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Pittsburgh | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs San Diego | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs San Francisco | $0.04 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs St. Louis | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
| Toronto vs Washington | $0.01 | $1.00 | 0% |
Market Discussion
Limited public discussion available for this market.
4. Trader Dashboard
A deterministic, per-market integrity scorecard computed from order-book and price data. Higher is better for Trader Trust, Liquidity, Move Quality and Resolution; higher means more risk for Quote Risk and Avoid Risk.
A's vs ArizonaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
A's vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
A's vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
A's vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
A's vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Baltimore vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Baltimore vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Baltimore vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Baltimore vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Baltimore vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Baltimore vs WashingtonTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Boston vs ArizonaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Boston vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Boston vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Boston vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Boston vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Boston vs New York MTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Boston vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Boston vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Boston vs St. LouisTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Chicago WS vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Chicago WS vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Chicago WS vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Chicago WS vs MiamiTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Chicago WS vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Chicago WS vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Chicago WS vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Cleveland vs ArizonaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Cleveland vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Cleveland vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Cleveland vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Cleveland vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Cleveland vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Cleveland vs PittsburghTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs ArizonaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs ColoradoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs MiamiTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs New York MTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs PittsburghTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs San FranciscoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Detroit vs St. LouisTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Houston vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Houston vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Houston vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Houston vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Houston vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Houston vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Kansas City vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Kansas City vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Los Angeles A vs ArizonaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Los Angeles A vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Los Angeles A vs MiamiTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Los Angeles A vs New York MTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Los Angeles A vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Los Angeles A vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Minnesota vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Minnesota vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Minnesota vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs CincinnatiTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs New York MTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs PittsburghTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
New York Y vs St. LouisTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs ArizonaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs New York MTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs PittsburghTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs San FranciscoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs St. LouisTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Seattle vs WashingtonTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs ArizonaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs MiamiTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs PittsburghTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs San FranciscoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Tampa Bay vs St. LouisTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Texas vs ArizonaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Texas vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Texas vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Texas vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Texas vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Texas vs PhiladelphiaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Texas vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Toronto vs AtlantaTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Toronto vs Chicago CTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Toronto vs Los Angeles DTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Toronto vs MilwaukeeTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
- Metric
- —
Toronto vs San DiegoTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—No significant move
- Factor
- move_log_odds
- 0
trader_dashboard_lean_v1.13 · computed Aug 26, 2026
5. Which Teams Have Top MLB Farm Systems for 2026 Preseason?
| Consensus Top-10 Farm Systems | 9 teams (MLB Pipeline, Baseball America) [^] |
|---|---|
| Primary Research Focus | Organizational prospect pools and farm system strength [^] |
| Missing Data Point | Core young player contract control through 2026 [^] |
Nine teams hold a consensus top-10 farm system in 2026. Based on 2026 preseason rankings from both MLB Pipeline and Baseball America, these nine organizations demonstrate significant minor league depth and future potential [^]. The teams identified as possessing these top-tier farm systems are the Baltimore Orioles, Milwaukee Brewers, San Diego Padres, Chicago Cubs, Cleveland Guardians, Cincinnati Reds, Pittsburgh Pirates, Arizona Diamondbacks, and New York Yankees.
Assessing core young players' control through 2026 is not possible. While the listed teams possess top-tier farm systems, the provided research does not offer sufficient detail to determine which "core young players," defined as those with under three years of Major League service time, will remain under team control through the 2026 season [^]. The available sources primarily evaluate and rank organizational prospect pools and overall farm system strength, often including supplementary top 100 prospect lists [^]. Crucially, information on exact service time accrual, current contractual status, or team control dates for active Major League players is beyond the scope of these farm system and prospect ranking publications.
6. What is the Oakland A's projected payroll and revenue in Sacramento?
| Projected 2025 Payroll | ~$100 million [^] |
|---|---|
| Annual TV Deal Revenue | $67 million [^] |
| Annual Revenue Sharing | $50-60 million [^] |
The Oakland A's project increased financial stability during their 2025-2027 Sacramento interim. A new three-year television deal with NBC Sports California is set to provide the team with $67 million annually [^]. This will be supplemented by an anticipated $50-60 million annual revenue-sharing check from MLB, attributed to their low local revenue [^]. These revenue streams are expected to enable the A's to generate more revenue during their time in Sacramento than they did in Oakland [^].
Regarding payroll, the A's plan an approximate $100 million budget for 2025. While initial figures based on guaranteed contracts suggest a lower amount [^], financial reports indicate an intention to reach approximately $100 million [^]. This projected spending represents a significant increase from the team's historically low payrolls in previous seasons. A $100 million payroll would position the A's among the bottom third of MLB teams, surpassing the Pittsburgh Pirates ($65.8 million), Cleveland Guardians ($82.5 million), and Miami Marlins ($86.6 million) [^]. However, it still places them among the most budget-conscious franchises, just outside the very bottom quartile of league spending for 2025 [^].
7. Which MLB Teams Have Most Payroll Space Below CBT Thresholds?
| 2025 CBT Threshold | $241 million [^] |
|---|---|
| 2026 CBT Threshold | $245 million [^] |
| Guardians' 2025 Payroll Space | $139.765 million below CBT [^] |
According to payroll projections from Spotrac and FanGraphs' RosterResource, several current top-15 teams by 2024 record are projected to have substantial payroll space below the Competitive Balance Tax (CBT) for the 2025 and 2026 off-seasons. The CBT threshold is set at $241 million for 2025 and $245 million for 2026 [^]. The teams identified with the most significant projected financial flexibility include the Cleveland Guardians, Kansas City Royals, Milwaukee Brewers, Baltimore Orioles, and Cincinnati Reds.
Projected payroll space varies substantially among top-15 teams for 2025 and 2026. For 2025, the Cleveland Guardians lead with a projected $139.765 million below the CBT, followed by the Cincinnati Reds ($135 million), Milwaukee Brewers ($133.7 million), Baltimore Orioles ($128.975 million), and Kansas City Royals ($120 million) [^]. Looking ahead to 2026, the Kansas City Royals are projected to have the largest payroll space below the CBT at $191 million. They are followed by the Milwaukee Brewers ($190.7 million), the Baltimore Orioles ($182.975 million), the Cleveland Guardians ($178.265 million), and the Cincinnati Reds ($172 million) [^]. These projections suggest significant financial flexibility for these teams to pursue player acquisitions or extensions in the coming off-seasons. In contrast, other top-15 teams like the New York Yankees ($315.501 million), Philadelphia Phillies ($253.3 million), and Los Angeles Dodgers ($257.8 million) are all projected to exceed the 2025 CBT threshold of $241 million [^].
8. Which MLB Teams Consistently Excel in Trade Deadline Value?
| Consistent Trade Surplus Value | Los Angeles Dodgers [^], Atlanta Braves [^] |
|---|---|
| 2023 Deadline Impact | Texas Rangers (Max Scherzer, Jordan Montgomery acquisitions) [^] |
| 2024 Deadline Winners | Baltimore Orioles (strategic acquisitions) [^] |
From 2022 to 2024, the Los Angeles Dodgers and Atlanta Braves consistently achieved high trade surplus value. These teams effectively acquired significant Wins Above Replacement (WAR) while minimizing the WAR value of assets traded away. The Los Angeles Dodgers are recognized for adding impactful talent without substantially depleting their prospect capital, consistently demonstrating a high trade surplus value through immediate contributions from proven players [^]. Similarly, the Atlanta Braves have proven adept at making astute deals that bolster their roster with high-impact players, leading to a positive WAR differential when evaluated against the value of traded prospects or players [^].
Recent trade deadlines featured teams making highly impactful acquisitions to maximize their trade surplus value. In 2023, the Texas Rangers were noted for making acquisitions, including Max Scherzer and Jordan Montgomery, that significantly altered their season by providing a substantial WAR boost, directly contributing to their World Series victory [^]. For the 2024 deadline, the Baltimore Orioles were identified as winners for strategic acquisitions expected to add considerable WAR to their roster without sacrificing significant long-term assets [^]. These instances exemplify how teams bring in talent whose value disproportionately outweighs the assets they trade away, whether through immediate impact or future contributions [^].
9. What Are the Latest High-Profile MLB Free Agent Signings?
| Juan Soto Contract Value | $765 million over 15 years [^] |
|---|---|
| Juan Soto Signing Team | New York Mets [^] |
| Corbin Burnes Contract Value | $210 million over six years [^] |
Juan Soto joined the Mets for a record-setting $765 million contract. The New York Mets successfully secured the premier free agent with a 15-year, $765 million deal [^]. Prior to his signing, numerous prominent teams were frequently mentioned as major contenders for Soto, including the New York Yankees, Los Angeles Dodgers, Boston Red Sox, and Toronto Blue Jays [^]. ESPN highlighted Soto's potential to significantly alter the trajectory for interested suitors such as the Mets and Yankees [^].
Corbin Burnes signed with the Diamondbacks, enhancing their competitive outlook. The highly sought-after pitcher finalized a significant six-year, $210 million deal with the Arizona Diamondbacks [^]. This strategic acquisition by the Diamondbacks is expected to significantly bolster their roster for upcoming seasons, including 2026 [^]. These high-profile signings underscore how teams actively pursue top talent to enhance their competitive outlook.
10. What Could Change the Odds
Key Catalysts
Catalyst analysis unavailable.
Key Dates & Catalysts
- Expiration: November 08, 2026
- Closes: November 01, 2026
11. Decision-Flipping Events
- Trigger: Catalyst analysis unavailable.
13. Historical Resolutions
No historical resolution data available for this series.
