TEX has the best week for hitters; CLE the toughest.
Two things decide a week and neither is on a rankings page: how many games a team plays, and who they play. Between August 8 and August 14, 2026 the league splits 24 teams play 6 / 6 teams play 7, and opponents range from allowing 3.93 runs a game to 5.02, a spread worth more than most waiver moves.
Most games against the pitching that gives up the most. This is the column to use for streaming bats and for deciding which of two similar players to start all week.
| Team | Games | Opp runs allowed/gm | Opponents |
|---|---|---|---|
| TEX | 7 | 4.92 | LAA x4, BAL x2, ATH |
| BOS | 7 | 4.86 | TOR x4, ATH x2, PIT |
| LAD | 7 | 4.53 | KC x3, AZ x2, MIL x2 |
| LAA | 7 | 4.47 | TEX x4, MIA x2, KC |
| MIL | 7 | 4.39 | SD x3, MIN x2, LAD x2 |
| CHC | 6 | 5.02 | WSH x3, KC x2, STL |
| TB | 6 | 5.02 | ATH x3, SEA x2, BAL |
| CIN | 6 | 4.92 | CWS x3, WSH x2, MIA |
The opposite question, and it needs the opposite column: most games against the offenses that score the least. A team can have a fine week for its bats and a poor one for its arms, which is why these are two tables and not one strength-of-schedule number.
| Team | Games | Opp runs scored/gm | Opponents |
|---|---|---|---|
| BOS | 7 | 4.17 | TOR x4, ATH x2, PIT |
| LAA | 7 | 4.18 | TEX x4, MIA x2, KC |
| TEX | 7 | 4.26 | LAA x4, BAL x2, ATH |
| LAD | 7 | 4.47 | KC x3, AZ x2, MIL x2 |
| TOR | 7 | 4.48 | BOS x4, PHI x2, NYY |
| MIL | 7 | 4.59 | SD x3, MIN x2, LAD x2 |
| DET | 6 | 4.06 | CLE x3, SF x2, CWS |
| HOU | 6 | 4.15 | SF x3, SD x2, SEA |
Fewest games, toughest opposition. If you have a marginal player here, this is the week to use the roster spot on someone else.
| Team | Games | Opp runs allowed/gm | Opponents |
|---|---|---|---|
| CLE | 6 | 4.01 | DET x3, CWS x2, SD |
| ATH | 6 | 4.02 | TB x3, BOS x2, TEX |
| NYY | 6 | 4.05 | SEA x3, ATL x2, TOR |
| SEA | 6 | 4.08 | NYY x3, TB x2, HOU |
| KC | 6 | 4.15 | LAD x3, CHC x2, LAA |
Texas and Boston are the whole story next week, and the reason is not opponent quality. Seven games against pitching staffs that give up 4.92 and 4.86 runs a game is roughly a sixth more volume than the six-game teams get, sitting on top of the second and third softest slates on the board. That combination is rare. Normally the seven-game weeks land against good teams, because a team playing an extra game is usually playing a division opponent it sees often. Here it does not. A Rangers or Red Sox bat you were platooning, or a fifth outfielder you keep for counting stats, starts every day this week without a second thought.
The comparison that should settle it is Chicago and Tampa Bay. Both draw the softest pitching on the slate at 5.02 runs allowed per game, and both play six. That is a better per-game environment than Texas gets. It is not a better week. One extra game is about seventeen percent more plate appearances, and the gap in opponent quality between 5.02 and 4.92 is a tenth of a run, which is noise across six or seven games. I would start the Rangers bat over the Cub every time here, and I would not consider it close. The mechanism is simple: game count is a near-certainty, opponent run environment is an average that a single starting pitcher can wreck.
The strongest case against that is playing time itself. A seven-game week almost always means a doubleheader or a compressed travel stretch, which is exactly when a manager rests a regular or a part-timer loses the second half of a twin bill. If your Boston hitter is a strong-side platoon guy rather than an everyday player, the seventh game may never reach him, and you have paid for volume you did not receive. Check the lineup card, not the schedule. If he sits the front end of the doubleheader, the edge is gone and the six-game bat with the better matchups was the right call.
On the pitching side the calculus flips, and it flips hard. Boston's opponents score 4.17 runs a game, the lowest mark on the board, and Los Angeles of Anaheim is right behind at 4.18 with the same seven games. That is the pairing worth acting on: a two-start arm in either rotation gets volume and quiet offenses at the same time, which almost never happens together. Texas at 4.26 is nearly as good. Meanwhile Cleveland, the Athletics and Seattle all offer decent pitching environments at 4.47, 4.41 and 4.52, but only across six games, and their hitters are stuck against staffs allowing 4.01, 4.02 and 4.08. Bench those bats. There is no volume to rescue them.
Milwaukee is the trap. Seven games reads like an automatic start until you notice the opponents allow only 4.39 runs and score 4.59, the second-highest figure here. That is a week where the extra game helps your hitters modestly and actively hurts your pitchers. I would ride the bats for the volume and sit anyone in that rotation I am not obligated to start, because 4.59 runs of opposing offense across two turns is a lot of exposure to a bad ratio night. Cincinnati at 4.99 is worse still, and only gets six games to do damage in.
The decision list is short. Start every Texas and Boston bat you own. Start the two-start Boston or Angels arm ahead of a nominally better pitcher facing a six-game Cincinnati or Arizona slate. Sit Cleveland and Athletics hitters. If a rainout hits Texas or Boston mid-week and the seventh game vanishes, the whole edge collapses to a rounding error, and that is the one thing that would prove this read wrong.
Game count leads and opponent quality breaks the tie, in that order. The difference between five games and seven is nearly a third of a week's production from the same player, which is a bigger effect than any realistic difference in who is pitching.
Hitters and pitchers get separate tables because they are asking opposite questions. Your bats want opponents who allow runs; your arms want opponents who do not score them, and one number cannot say both.
Opponent quality is full-season runs per game, not a recent hot streak. Ten games of a pitching staff is noise, and the question here is which schedule to prefer rather than which team is playing well this week.
Curated picks where the model has the highest decision conviction. Updated every render.
Run rankings to populate Market Edge.
Run rankings first.
Mark a player as drafted to get a recommendation.
Studies and awards - the research-side surfaces of the managr platform.
Live snapshot of the projection system.
Backtest, parsimony, ablation, and benchmark - one synthesized report. Output renders in Validation.
Final Value = Raw Projection × MasterConfidence × TeamContext. Each layer answers one question - no overlap.
Recency weighting: prior seasons contribute by recency (more recent = more weight) and sample size (more PA = more weight).
Shrinkage: observed rates regress toward position-specific population means by an amount inversely proportional to sample size. Catches small-sample outliers.
Quality-of-contact adjustments: xwOBA, barrel rate, and bat-tracking metrics replace luck-driven outcome stats with skill-driven ones.
PT modeling: projected PA is anchored to workload tier (full-time, regular, platoon, backup catcher) using historical role distributions.
Monte Carlo: N simulated seasons per player using projected mean + uncertainty, producing P10 / P50 / P90 distribution and bust%.
Confidence layers: four orthogonal multipliers: Roster (depth chart), Role (PT certainty), Sample (career PA), Market (consensus alignment). The Audit tab shows all four for every player.
VAR: Value Above Replacement at the player's primary position. Replacement levels are floored per position so SS scarcity doesn't artificially inflate stable middle infielders.
Tune component weights against historical seasons. Stored in session.
-
-
-
Walk-forward backtests, calibration quality, and benchmark comparisons. Run walk-forward first - most tools depend on its pair pool.
Projects every historical batter-season from prior data only. Reports RMSE, MAE, Spearman ρ, hit rates. Populates the pair pool other validators use.
Walk-forward over historical seasons. Reports RMSE, MAE, Spearman ρ, top-N hit rates.
Distribution, uncertainty, per-archetype performance, calibrated tiers, draft sim.
Load any rival projection or ADP source. Auto-detects player_name + rank / adp / projected.
Where the model finds value the market is missing.
Curated picks from current rankings.
Where the model has measurable advantage.
The safety layer. Realism, false-confidence, forensics - what to remove.
The most important governance tools. Output renders in Validation.
Per-era ablation, error clusters, bias, correlations, removals. Each tells you what to remove. Run walk-forward first.
The smallest model that retains predictive power. Every feature beats the burden of proof.
Live pipeline status and data freshness.
-
Last known status of each underlying data source.
Source status will appear once data has been refreshed.
Issues from the most recent data refresh, if any.
-
MVP, Cy Young, Rookie of the Year - historical winners with their stats, plus model-predicted current-season winners.
Predictions from the current 2026 projection model. Top candidates per award based on projected fantasy points + advanced-stat underlying. League assignment from current team.
Coaching rosters for every MLB team plus a multi-year Fantasy Points Above Average ranking of every MLB coach.
Findings article + all-time top-100 performer leaderboard from every World Baseball Classic (2006-2026).
A growing collection of fantasy baseball studies. Each card opens a detail page with the methodology, the data sources, and (where the data exists today) live computed findings.
Active player injuries, refreshed from upstream sources.
| Player | Team | Pos | Status | Explanation | Replacement |
|---|
Enter players for each side, one per line. Values use your scoring weights and injury-adjusted projections.
| Player | Pos | ProjPts | Status |
|---|
| Player | Pos | ProjPts | Status |
|---|
Every signal, formula, and data source the model uses for player evaluation - organized by product.
Configure your draft session. This stays on this device only.