2026 MLB Draft Preview and Updated Rankings

Vahn Lackey Photo: Petre Thomas-Imagn Images

The 2026 MLB Draft begins tomorrow. Dreams will come true, and the course of baseball history will be altered not just by the talent of the players, but by the collective decisions of hundreds of hard-working people with teams and agencies who have been preparing for this since long before last year’s draft even began. Even though the current CBA negotiations and the owners’ proposal to maim the draft’s current format casts something of a shadow on this year’s event, it’s an exciting time for everyone, myself included. I not only get to learn about this class of players and share opinions about their baseball futures with our readers, I also get to highlight the strategies teams might use to maximize the talent they come away with. The bonus pool system, and the ways that teams, players, and their representatives navigate the “game” of the draft, is one of the things that separates baseball’s selection meeting from those of other sports. It rewards strategy, creativity and the cultivation of information that has nothing to do with hard baseball data. In this post, I’ll talk about the makeup and quality of this year’s class, take you through the pockets of players that pose difficult questions for clubs, and discuss a couple potential draft strategies, as well as which teams might best be able to execute them.

You’ll find the scouting reports and tool grades of 146 players over on The Board. Of that group, the 75 with a 40+ FV or above grade have an ordinal ranking, with the balance grouped by demographic. Brendan and I may still pepper that space with additional players between now and the draft, but they’ll be guys who fall lower on the list. The hard-ranked players are the ones who we’re most excited about.

Let’s Take the Temperature of the Talent

The industry generally sees this as a bit of a down draft. I agree with that sentiment at the very top, where this class lacks an obviously elite talent and instead has a three-player tier of guys who you’d be thrilled to take with picks three to five in a typical draft, but not necessarily first overall.

There’s also a weird vacuum in the middle of the first round that’s the result of this being an inordinately risky group, mostly due to injuries. It’s one thing to be excited about Texas A&M second baseman Chris Hacopian (the data darling college hitter of this year’s class who dealt with back issues this season) or Arizona State lefty Cole Carlon (who touches 100 and has the best slider in the entire draft, but also was removed from a late-season start after his velo dipped) from our perspective as outside observers, but it’s another matter entirely to use a top 15 pick on (and give $5 million to) someone with a scary injury history or medical report. There are several players, mostly college pitchers, who would ordinarily have the talent to come off the board in the pick 10-20 range of most drafts, but injuries might cause them to slide later in the round.

Still, this isn’t exclusively a health-related issue. There are some incredibly talented and accomplished players whose profiles have one ominous detail that, depending on the team or scout, could reasonably make the drafter apprehensive about them. In this draft in particular there are lots of toolsy prospects who might not be able to hit big league pitching consistently enough to be any good. High school shortstop Jacob Lombard is an unbelievable athlete for his size and might be a plus defender at short with plus-plus power at maturity. He also had a 61% contact rate against decent-to-good high school pitchers on the showcase circuit, a rate lower than any big leaguer. This dynamic also applies to Alabama shortstop Justin Lebron (an elite defender with exciting power projection) and several of the college catchers, including Golden Spikes winner Daniel Jackson from Georgia, who slugged .800 this year.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

There’s always a portion of the draft where teams get sufficiently nervous about these sorts of players that they run to safe-feeling college hitters who make a lot of contact, usually in big conferences. This tends to happen in the mid-to-late first round. You draft Sal Frelick, or Nico Hoerner, or Justin Foscue, or Trevor Larnach, or Logan Warmoth (they don’t always work out) and feel at least fine about it. This year, that might start happening inside the top 10. There aren’t enough healthy and exciting college pitchers, or super talented high school players, to push the run on this type of college hitter down toward the middle of the first round. Stable hitters like Hacopian, 5-foot-9 Georgia Tech outfielder Drew Burress, LSU center fielder Derek Curiel and Louisville outfielder Zion Rose are the candidates to fill the vacuum.

The Class Has Impressive Depth

Every year it feels like there are more high school pitchers with light-you-up stuff. We aren’t all that far removed from Tyler Kolek and Riley Pint going in the top couple of picks. Now there are high school righties throwing 100 who won’t even go in the first round. Some of the scouting industry’s adjustment to this demographic comes from the failures of past selections. It’s a risky contingent playing Russian Roulette with their ligaments every week for three or four years between when they’re drafted and when they reach the big leagues. But part of why high school pitchers are being “de-valued” at the very top of the draft is because the talent pool is suddenly flooded with good ones. The understanding and use of science in training, nutrition, biomechanics, and pitch design has flowed from the highest levels of baseball all the way down to whichever Zoomer is curious and motivated enough to apply it to himself. As a result, there are 16 high school pitchers in this draft to whom I’d be tempted to give $2 million or more to. But there are only so many picks, and there are about 75 players in this draft, regardless of position or age, to whom that applies, while there are only about 50 draft slots with bonus amounts of $2 million or more. There might be a few teams that are in a position to take advantage of that talent overage.

Which Teams Have the Power?

Each individual draft pick slot has an assigned bonus amount that contributes to the total pool a team is allowed to spend. Teams with early selections and/or a copious number of picks have the biggest bonus pools, and usually leave the weekend with the most talent. Here are the teams with more than $14 million to spend this year, as well as their total pool amounts:

  • Pirates: $19,130,700
  • Rays: $19,009,300
  • White Sox: $17,592,100
  • Giants: $17,350,600
  • Twins: $16,929,600
  • Cardinals: $16,612,300
  • Royals: $15,954,000
  • Braves: $15,870,800
  • Rockies: $15,557,600

The Braves, Giants, Royals and Cardinals are arguably in the most interesting position of this group because their second picks (26th, 29th, 30th, and 32nd overall, respectively) come before the second picks of the teams ahead of them on this bonus pool leaderboard. If there is an expensive player or two who the Pirates, Rays, White Sox or Twins are hoping to float to their second pick, that quartet above (depending on what they did with their first selections) is in position to spoil the fun and offer that player enough to sign. The Pirates, who have baseball’s best farm system before accounting for prospect graduations, have five picks in the first three rounds and the biggest bonus pool.

The Impact of NIL Money

A growing dynamic affecting the signability of players is the money college programs are able to offer them. This is less of an issue for the top-of-the-class talents, and more a source of tension for established college players in rounds 6-10. There are some players who are more impactful in the college game than they are valued in pro ball, mostly the big, positionless mashers and the pitchers who are rotation staples in college but have fringe stuff compared to big leaguers. These are the sorts of players who schools are offering $500,000 in NIL money to, while the slot value of picks after the fifth round dips below that figure. Though there are definitely good players drafted after the fifth round every year, you could argue this issue mostly impacts the quality of org guys rather than those who we’d consider to be actual prospects. But even if that’s true, it’s contributing to the degradation of the overall level of play in the minors.

How Will Teams Under New Leadership Behave?

The thought processes of successful teams tend to permeate the rest of the league over time as executives a level or two below the GM/POBO are hired to run other orgs. There are several teams that have changed leadership during the last couple of years, and those new folks might bring their old team’s strategy to the draft room. It sometimes takes a couple of years to suss out whether that’s happened, and if so, what those tendencies are. Sometimes teams copy the approach of others without there being connective tissue like this; they just see the strategy being used and decide it’s a good idea to try it themselves. For example, for the last several years, the Brewers have employed a strategy where they save bonus space early on so they can keep taking mid-six-figure type players at a point late in the draft when the rest of the league is mostly drafting organizational filler. But part of their ability to continue to do so successfully might depend on them being the only ones with this approach. I’m curious if anyone else will start to try this since the Brewers are a team that’s generally very highly regarded.





Eric Longenhagen is from Catasauqua, PA and currently lives in Tempe, AZ. He spent four years working for the Phillies Triple-A affiliate, two with Baseball Info Solutions and two contributing to prospect coverage at ESPN.com. Previous work can also be found at Sports On Earth, CrashburnAlley and Prospect Insider.

37 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago

This is going to be a fascinating draft to look back on precisely because of the flaws and injury concerns that you reference. I don’t think this is 2020 where the entire top ten was a massive disappointment, but each of the top guys has an issue that would make you nervous about selecting them. There is probably more deviation amongst the thirty draft boards for this group than for any other in the last decade. I generally have strong opinions for or against prospects, but with this group I find myself hedging on nearly everyone.

Good luck to the GMs making these decisions because I’m glad I don’t have to.

Pirates HurdlesMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

Max Meyer, Hancock, Tork (two 30HR seasons) and Gonzales are still trying to change that “massive disappointment” but I get the overall vibe.

Last edited 21 days ago by Pirates Hurdles
sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago

The top 10 picks in the 2020-2022 drafts were disappointing, but part of that is that they look awful in comparison to the 2019, 2023, and 2024 drafts.

The 2019 draft has several regular all-star caliber players in the top few picks all by itself, including Bobby Witt and Adley in the top 2. CJ Abrams and Riley Greene went 5th and 6th, and Corbin Carroll unexpectedly slipped but was widely considered to be a Top 10 talent. Corbin Carroll. Andrew Vaughn and JJ Bleday have put up 2.4 fWAR in about 450 PAs this year combined and are widely seen as disappointments.

The 2023 draft produced Skenes and Langford in the top four. Jacob Wilson is a competent MLB players already, and Max Clark looks great. Chase Dollander looked like he might have finally been turning the corner before his injury. and Walker Jenkins still might turn into a plus regular.

The first pick in the 2024 draft made the all star game this year already. And if you did a redraft of the top 10 only he would go no higher than fourth (behind Burns, Griffin, and Kurtz), and possibly as low as sixth (Wetherholt, Jac). Charie Condon also might turn into a plus regular.

Meanwhile if you took all of the top 10 guys from 2020-2022 and combined them you’d probably have Max Meyer, Emerson Hancock, Nick Gonzales, Reid Detmers, Colton Cowser, and Cade Horton. If you combine them, that’s basically as good as any one of those other three drafts.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago

Meyer, Hancock, Torkelson, and Gonzales have 10.9 career fWAR between the four of them.

fredsbankMember since 2020
21 days ago

torkelson’s home runs are cute but he can barely hit the mendoza line. 2025 seems now to be the outlier of his career.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

For a draft with (in my opinion) three 55s and three 50s I don’t feel super confident about any of them either. The upside on all of them is kind of big–you can easily see how any of them could wind up as 5+ win players. But they all have something about them that makes me question whether they’re going to even come close to expectations.

And that’s not including most of the crazy number of prep lefties, or college pitchers with injury questions, or the five or so exciting prep shortstops with power projection and hit tool questions.

Greens
21 days ago

Cholowsky having high risk on the board seems strange.

richwp01Member since 2019
21 days ago
Reply to  Greens

I am a little confused by the board. The College SS is High Risk and the HS SS is Low risk? Maybe the risk is in HIT tool. I am confused by Roch’s 40 FV Hit with 45 Pitch Selection and 50 Bat Control. Is his swing so bad it needs complete overhaul? I am surprised his Hit is below his bat control and pitch selection.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  richwp01

Yes, the risk is entirely in hit tool. Emerson has an absolutely gorgeous swing whereas Cholowsky’s has some serious concerns. Roch not only has extreme wrap, his hands are incredibly deep as he strides. Jackson Holliday has the same issues, although Cholowsky has better overall bat speed, so he won’t be as completely hopeless as Holliday has been against fastballs.

bubblesMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

They are different calibers of prospects at draft time, but I remember a few years ago everyone saying Chase Davis had a beautiful swing that looked like CarGos. The swing style itself matters some, but plenty of players with ugly swings excel. The thing that matters more is how well can you put the bat in the ball and consistently hit it hard at a good angle.

I am not talking down Emerson as I have him #2 on my board but my question is does he get some impact power. I am just more making a point about swing aesthetics.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  bubbles

Fair, but when I talk about gorgeous I’m saying that it is a swing without flaws. Emerson is clearly going to hit. I share your uncertainty regarding how much power he will end up with.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago
Reply to  Greens

Eric is concerned that he needs a swing change in order to be a league average hitter, that his swing is going to get exposed against better velocity.

Willy Adames is the guy I use as a reference point. What I’m seeing when I look at Cholowsky is a bit like Adames from 2021-2024. That’s a guy who can hit 25-30 homers a year, get on base at a decent clip, and put up a 120 wRC+ regularly while playing double-plus defense at shortstop. That’s a 5+ win player, something like Adames’s 2021 or 2024 on offense and his 2022 or 2023 on defense.

But other people look at Cholowsky and see a guy who (even after a swing change) is going to hit .210 and maybe won’t even get to his power. That’s something like Adames’s 2023 or 2026 on offense, which would still be a pretty good player with double plus shortstop defense but not a star.

Personally I’ll take Cholowsky #1 and not think much about it. I remember a ways back that Eric was also really down on Bo Bichette because of a noisy swing. A good reminder that just because guys like this need a fix doesn’t mean they can’t do it. Cholowsky isn’t exactly “safe” but he has good tools and he has the performance and I’m not sure what else I would ask for other than that.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

But other people look at Cholowsky and see a guy who (even after a swing change) is going to hit .210 and maybe won’t even get to his power. 

.210 would be a 30 hit tool, not a 40. And he’s only a 40 if he doesn’t change his swing, as his bat speed and contact rates are above average. The issue is that his extreme bat wrap and deep hand placement will make him late against great four seam fastballs. That is fixable but you generally don’t want to take someone 1-1 who needs something to be fixed. Unfortunately, everyone in this class has a major question mark.

I remember a ways back that Eric was also really down on Bo Bichette because of a noisy swing. 

That’s actually a great point, as Bichette is someone with similar issues who has obviously made it work. This is entirely subjective, but when I watch their respective swings, Bichette looks much smoother to me.

I like Grady Emerson’s swing a lot, I’m just not sure how much power he’s going to develop and Cholowsky is obviously the better defender.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

I remember way back a long time ago someone asked Eric what the biggest disagreement he had with Keith Law, as I think he had worked with Law and was / is still friendly with him. He said Bichette and it wasn’t even close, that Law loved him and Eric saw a swing that would never work. I believe a writeup for Bichette is where I read Eric’s line “a swing noisier than a Dinosaur Jr show.”

But at some point he cleaned it up. I think it was when he was in AA, but I don’t really remember. And Eric saw him and said “huh, I guess now I like what he does now.”

And that’s kind of what I think is going to happen with Cholowsky. At least to some extent.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Cholowsky would be top on my board as well, I just don’t see superstar potential there. I think the Dansby Swanson comparison is spot on.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

Sometimes these “low ceiling” guys who can stay at a premium position surprise you. They’re not all Bobby Witt / Konnor Griffin level athletes.

That said if someone is looking for that sort of power / speed combo then I would think Eric Booth is the guy they would be looking for. Maybe Rocco Maniscalso if you’re willing to wait a while.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

My hope is that either Booth or Flora make it to the Orioles at #7.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

While it is possible I doubt Booth makes it down that far because someone in the #4-#6 range is going to fall in love with his athleticism. But Flora or Bell have a decent shot of winding up there if someone decides they want to gamble on Lombard or if the Royals decide to cut a deal with a pitcher.

Kiley has both Flora and Bell falling to the O’s pick (and them picking Flora), and Eric has Bell falling to them (and for them picking him).

Either of those would be a pretty good outcome for them. The other names I’ve seen are a lot scarier (Lombard, Lebron, Helfrick) or less exciting (Burress, Curiel, Hacopian). If all six of the top guys go in that order I don’t have a clue what I would do at #7.

gettwobrute79Member since 2026
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

Isn’t his swing just as worrisome if not more so than Roch’s? The athleticism sounds awfully enticing, but it sounds like a lot with Booth’s swing would have to change. Asking here, I’m no swing guru.

Last edited 21 days ago by gettwobrute79
jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  gettwobrute79

Isn’t his swing just as worrisome if not more so than Roch’s?

Far more worrisome, but that’s why he’s not going in the top three while Cholowsky undoubtedly will. Booth has arguably the higher upside, as he is an elite athlete with plus plus speed, but he has a substantially lower floor.

gettwobrute79Member since 2026
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

Yes, but Booth could go as high as 4 so we’re really not talking much of a gap between the two. Even with Booth’s upside, I’m not sure I’d want to roll the dice on something like a swing you’d have to overhaul immediately.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  gettwobrute79

Every single team would take Cholowsky over Booth, so that’s not really relevant. The question is who you would take after the better guys are no longer available. If you want to go the high floor but low ceiling route then you take Burress. If you want high ceiling even at the risk of a low floor then you take Booth.

Graham LewisMember since 2019
21 days ago

I get he’s young but your report on Bo Lowrance makes him sound like a high school 1st baseman with disappointing bat speed. Seems like a very risky top 10 pick.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago

It’s a good draft to have a Comp A or early second round pick. The difference between the 12th guy in this draft (Drew Burress) and the 45th (Taylor Rabe) is not big at all.

It might even stretch down into the Comp B and early third round. I think 75 guys with an FV40+ or higher is a new record for The Board here, although it’s only really directly comparable back to 2021.

Graham LewisMember since 2019
21 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The Patrick Bailey trade is starting to look a little more shrewd

warpath
21 days ago
Reply to  Graham Lewis

It also helps that Bailey hasn’t exactly covered himself in glory in Cleveland… The bat has rebounded from early in the year but still isn’t below average, and the framing numbers are merely above average this year as opposed to the superlative numbers from years past.

It’s still early on that transaction but it could be a pretty interesting one to unpack years from now.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The difference between the 12th guy in this draft (Drew Burress) and the 45th (Taylor Rabe) is not big at all.

That’s moreso because Rabe should be ranked a lot higher than 45th. I get the cautiousness of the ranking given that he only pitched 92.1 innings in college and didn’t have amazing results, but he was really impressive in the College World Series. My one concern about him is how his four seam fastball will do against elite hitters.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

I don’t disagree with you about Rabe and that I would move him up in the ordinal rankings but I don’t think that would change my opinion too much. Because I also don’t think there’s much difference in value between Burress and Rocco Maniscalso or Jack Radel or Aiden Ruiz. Basically any guy who isn’t a prep pitcher between #36 and #45 any way I could order it doesn’t seem that different than Burress to me.

gettwobrute79Member since 2026
21 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The Bucs have four picks in the top 51. Given 51 isn’t protected, that pick feels like a college guy. Beyond that, I think I’m hoping it’s Flora. Burress would be kind of an in between-LeBron and Lombard I want no part of.

The 34 and 44-one of those has gotta be a prep arm. It’s the strength of the class and they’re often swimming in those waters. They also like prep righties who have two-way potential or could have been drafted as a position player: Jared Jones, Bubba Chandler, Seth Hernandez. So maybe it’s Coleman Borthwick? Archer Horn? Alex Weingartner? I think EL is right-they’ll likely get a bunch of their targets poached by teams drafting their second pick before the Bucs do.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago
Reply to  gettwobrute79

IMO any of Flora, Booth, or Bell makes sense for them. Burress could be fine but he is definitely unexciting compared to someone like Booth.

Rumor has it they want a bat, which I am inclined to disbelieve because not even the Pirates would draft for need.

As far as two way guys who likely will be pitchers, Koeninger is the guy who stands out. Borthwick would too except that rumor is he is going to school unless he gets blown away. Lucas Nawrocki and Landon Brown are also guys who I suspect will go higher than public rankings because they played two ways in HS and were pretty good as hitters. At the college level the guy is Evan Dempsey.

gettwobrute79Member since 2026
21 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

If the Pirates drafted for need, they wouldn’t have taken Seth Hernandez. Per Keith Law, some teams have Bell out of the first based on his medicals.

OtterMember since 2016
20 days ago
Reply to  gettwobrute79

And then the Pirates turn around and trade 34 for Jacob Gonzalez, who might have turned his career around this winter/season, but still a curious trade (as a Sox fan I’m shocked Getz had the foresight to do this). Seems to be money move? Though haven’t spent too much time looking at to the ‘why’ for the Pirates.
I imagine the Sox will take Thome’s kid now with 34 (or at least try since he’s local AND the son of a FO exec).

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago

A few guys I like with grades at or below 40 on The Board (or not on it at all) and also not listed as highly graded prospects other places I have seen. Probably none of them are any higher than a 40 but interesting targets in Rounds 3-6.

Beau Peterson: I’m not sure why public evaluators are down on him. I think it’s because people are seeing his size and think about him moving to first base, but not his power. But he performed well on the showcase circuit, his hit / power combo is pretty good, and he moves well for his size.

Eric Nachtsheim: Small school guy who throws hard and gets whiffs. You can work with that.

Ryan Piech: Xavier’s ace, and it looks like Xavier plays a pretty strong out of conference schedule. Looks like hitters have trouble picking up the ball and he throws strikes.

Landon Thiel: He’s a huge cold weather lefty, good projectability, and pretty athletic.

Jack Slightom: Big guy, cold weather arm. He’s probably going to bust but there are some great right tail outcomes.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Peterson’s issues are not pulling the ball in the air enough and not being very athletic. I don’t think he’s a third baseman as he moves up. He has plus raw power but his swing is a bit out of sync with his hips opening up early, causing him to hit a lot of balls to straight away rather than getting around on pitches and putting them over the right field fence. I also think he’s going to have a lot of issues with left-handed pitching because of the early hip rotation.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

This might be why teams think he is going to Texas.

Still sounds like good value in the third round but his price might be too high.

drewsylvaniaMember since 2019
21 days ago

I wonder if scouting can (at least somewhat reliably) evaluate whether a given player is or has been good at making adjustments to how they are pitched or hit. My guess is that’s hard to eval at such an early age, and hard to identify in general. Perhaps a proxy would be “does this player work on their craft consistently?”

Last edited 21 days ago by drewsylvania
gettwobrute79Member since 2026
21 days ago
Reply to  drewsylvania

Kiley touched on this a lot with Griffin and the adjustments he made immediately. It’s awfully hard to tell a players aptitude until they get into the pros.