You’re missing 373 higher-rarity predictions
You’re seeing Common & Bronze only — the two lowest rarities in the game. Silver, Gold, Diamond and Red Diamond are Pro, plus a live-market Value Gap, drill-down insights and signal history.
The bar to beat: 1 in 5 cards (22% of 2,878) got upgraded no matter what Radar scored them.
Signal 90–100Scored by Radar model v11 · 2 graded updates 86% upgraded · 4.0× vs chance · n=78 | |||||||||||||||
 Riley Cornelio WAS | RP |  57 | 100HotVery low confidence | — | 60+3 | 10Low | Upgrade | Pro | 125±15.6% · Oct 12 | 68 | 54If 60 (LS RP)26 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Ray Kerr ATL | RP | Bronze65 | 92HotVery low confidence | — | 68+3 | 13Low | Upgrade | Pro | 179±15.6% · Oct 12 | 179⚠ upside-only | 49If 68 (LS RP)57 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
Signal 80–89Scored by Radar model v11 · 2 graded updates 72% upgraded · 3.3× vs chance · n=129 | |||||||||||||||
 Brett Bateman TOR | CF | Bronze68 | 89HotVery low confidence | — | 71+3 | 31Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 111±15.6% · Oct 12 | 109 | 81If 71 (LS CF)14 LS CF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Lucas Spence HOU | CF | 62 | 87HotVery low confidence | Common→Bronze | 65+3 | 0Low | Upgrade | Pro | 148±15.6% · Oct 12 | 131 | 36If 65 (LS CF)9 LS CF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Eduardo Valencia DET | C | Bronze71 | 84HotVery low confidence | — | 74+3 | 9Low | Upgrade | Pro | 111±15.6% · Oct 12 | 97 | 68If 74 (LS C)10 LS C peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Hagen Smith CWS | RP | Bronze68 | 83HotVery low confidence | — | 71+3 | 11Low | Upgrade | Pro | 197±15.6% · Oct 12 | 130 | 67If 71 (LS RP)29 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 AJ Smith-Shawver ATL | RP | Bronze67 | 83HotVery low confidence | — | 70+3 | 20Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 122±15.6% · Oct 12 | 77 | 47If 70 (LS RP)27 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Miguel Ullola HOU | RP | 63 | 83HotVery low confidence | Common→Bronze | 66+3 | 2Low | Upgrade | Pro | 22±15.6% · Oct 12 | 21 | 44If 66 (LS RP)36 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Connor Norby COL | 1B | Bronze68 | 81HotVery low confidence | — | 71+3 | 17Low | Upgrade | Pro | 105±15.6% · Oct 12 | 90 | 96If 71 (LS 1B)9 LS 1B peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Esmerlyn Valdez PIT | RF | Bronze68 | 80HotVery low confidence | — | 71+3 | 19Low | Upgrade | Pro | 98±15.6% · Oct 12 | 80 | 64If 71 (LS RF)20 LS RF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Samy Natera Jr. LAA | RP | Bronze66 | 80HotVery low confidence | — | 69+3 | 0Low | Upgrade | Pro | 48±15.6% · Oct 12 | 48⚠ upside-only | 113If 69 (LS RP)19 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Tim Tawa ARI | 1B | Bronze65 | 80HotVery low confidence | — | 68+3 | 23Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 70±15.6% · Oct 12 | 56 | 55If 68 (LS 1B)11 LS 1B peers · comparable, not a forecast | 80% | Not enough recent games | ||
Signal 70–79Scored by Radar model v11 · 2 graded updates 61% upgraded · 2.8× vs chance · n=135 | |||||||||||||||
 Samad Taylor SD | LF | Bronze70 | 79LikelyVery low confidence | — | 72+2 | 12Low | Upgrade | Pro | 82±15.6% · Oct 12 | 67 | 69If 72 (LS LF)9 LS LF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 79% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Anthony Gose KC | RP | 63 | 79LikelyVery low confidence | Common→Bronze | 65+2 | 26Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 192±15.6% · Oct 12 | 135 | 31If 65 (LS RP)32 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 79% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Christian Encarnacion BAL | 3B | Bronze72 | 77LikelyVery low confidence | — | 74+2 | 21Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 84±15.6% · Oct 12 | 58 | 84If 74 (LS 3B)11 LS 3B peers · comparable, not a forecast | 77% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Cooper Pratt MIL | SS | Bronze69 | 76LikelyVery low confidence | — | 71+2 | 12Low | Upgrade | Pro | 77±15.6% · Oct 12 | 50 | 89If 71 (LS SS)9 LS SS peers · comparable, not a forecast | 76% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Jordan Lawlar ARI | CF | Bronze68 | 76LikelyVery low confidence | — | 70+2 | 31Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 98±15.6% · Oct 12 | 64 | 100If 70 (LS CF)9 LS CF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 76% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Tayler Saucedo LAA | RP | Bronze68 | 75LikelyVery low confidence | — | 70+2 | 8Low | Upgrade | Pro | 193±15.6% · Oct 12 | 127 | 47If 70 (LS RP)27 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 75% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Lawrence Butler OAK | RF | Bronze72 | 74LikelyVery low confidence | — | 74+2 | 34Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 56±15.6% · Oct 12 | 56⚠ upside-only | 47If 74 (LS RF)15 LS RF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 74% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Jacob Waguespack DET | RP | Bronze71 | 74LikelyVery low confidence | — | 73+2 | 7Low | Upgrade | Pro | 240±15.6% · Oct 12 | 172 | 64If 73 (LS RP)10 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 74% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Brett Baty NYM | 2B | Bronze68 | 74LikelyVery low confidence | — | 70+2 | 21Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 125±15.6% · Oct 12 | 74 | 64If 70 (LS 2B)11 LS 2B peers · comparable, not a forecast | 74% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Donovan Walton OAK | SS | Bronze66 | 74LikelyVery low confidence | — | 68+2 | 25Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 124±15.6% · Oct 12 | 89 | 110If 68 (LS SS)12 LS SS peers · comparable, not a forecast | 74% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Luis Mey CIN | RP | 64 | 74LikelyVery low confidence | Common→Bronze | 66+2 | 4Low | Upgrade | Pro | 88±15.6% · Oct 12 | 50 | 44If 66 (LS RP)36 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 74% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Luis Gastelum STL | RP | 58 | 74LikelyVery low confidence | — | 60+2 | 0Low | Upgrade | Pro | 138±15.6% · Oct 12 | 123 | 54If 60 (LS RP)26 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 74% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Juan Brito CIN | 2B | 57 | 74LikelyVery low confidence | — | 59+2 | 17Low | Upgrade | Pro | 70±15.6% · Oct 12 | 50 | 8If 59 (LS 2B)no direct sample · comparable, not a forecast | 74% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Drew Gilbert SF | LF | Bronze68 | 73LikelyVery low confidence | — | 70+2 | 19Low | Upgrade | Pro | 185±15.6% · Oct 12 | 85 | 109If 70 (LS LF)8 LS LF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 73% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Brendan Cellucci TOR | RP | 64 | 73LikelyVery low confidence | Common→Bronze | 66+2 | 0Low | Upgrade | Pro | 68±15.6% · Oct 12 | 58 | 44If 66 (LS RP)36 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 73% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Xander Bogaerts SD | SS | Bronze72 | 72LikelyVery low confidence | — | 74+2 | 25Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 90±15.6% · Oct 12 | 73 | 90If 74 (LS SS)10 LS SS peers · comparable, not a forecast | 72% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Josh Walker BAL | RP | Bronze65 | 72LikelyVery low confidence | — | 67+2 | 13Low | Upgrade | Pro | 106±15.6% · Oct 12 | 106⚠ upside-only | 84If 67 (LS RP)24 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 72% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Alex McFarlane PHI | RP | 63 | 72LikelyVery low confidence | Common→Bronze | 65+2 | 3Low | Upgrade | Pro | 59±15.6% · Oct 12 | 41 | 31If 65 (LS RP)32 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 72% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Bobby Miller LAD | RP | 61 | 72LikelyVery low confidence | — | 63+2 | 3Low | Upgrade | Pro | 98±15.6% · Oct 12 | 98⚠ upside-only | 64If 63 (LS RP)no direct sample · comparable, not a forecast | 72% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Jakob Marsee MIA | CF | Bronze72 | 71LikelyVery low confidence | — | 74+2 | 46High | Upgrade | Pro | 69±15.6% · Oct 12 | 65 | 58If 74 (LS CF)9 LS CF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 71% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Alex Freeland LAD | 2B | Bronze65 | 71LikelyVery low confidence | — | 67+2 | 8Low | Upgrade | Pro | 50±15.6% · Oct 12 | 38 | 104If 67 (LS 2B)12 LS 2B peers · comparable, not a forecast | 71% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Danny Jansen TEX | C | Bronze70 | 70LikelyVery low confidence | — | 72+2 | 27Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 165±15.6% · Oct 12 | 134 | 69If 72 (LS C)15 LS C peers · comparable, not a forecast | 70% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Trent Harris SF | RP | Bronze68 | 70LikelyVery low confidence | — | 70+2 | 7Low | Upgrade | Pro | 140±15.6% · Oct 12 | 105 | 47If 70 (LS RP)27 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 70% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Ben Malgeri DET | LF | Bronze67 | 70LikelyVery low confidence | — | 69+2 | 12Low | Upgrade | Pro | 244±15.6% · Oct 12 | 187 | 99If 69 (LS LF)13 LS LF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 70% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Matt Wilkinson SF | SP | Bronze67 | 70LikelyVery low confidence | — | 69+2 | 3Low | Upgrade | Pro | 119±15.6% · Oct 12 | 117 | 107If 69 (LS SP)11 LS SP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 70% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Josue De Paula LAD | RF | 63 | 70LikelyVery low confidence | Common→Bronze | 65+2 | 9Low | Upgrade | Pro | 188±15.6% · Oct 12 | 188⚠ upside-only | 67If 65 (LS RF)14 LS RF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 70% | Not enough recent games | ||
Signal 60–69Scored by Radar model v11 · 2 graded updates 46% upgraded · 2.1× vs chance · n=182 | |||||||||||||||
 Drew Sommers DET | RP | Bronze68 | 69LikelyVery low confidence | — | 70+2 | 11Low | Upgrade | Pro | 110±15.6% · Oct 12 | 104 | 47If 70 (LS RP)27 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 69% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Chase Petty CIN | RP | 62 | 69LikelyVery low confidence | — | 64+2 | 16Low | Upgrade | Pro | 123±15.6% · Oct 12 | 60 | 64If 64 (LS RP)no direct sample · comparable, not a forecast | 69% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Alec Gamboa BOS | RP | 62 | 69LikelyVery low confidence | — | 64+2 | 2Low | Upgrade | Pro | 113±15.6% · Oct 12 | 77 | 64If 64 (LS RP)no direct sample · comparable, not a forecast | 69% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Michael Arroyo SEA | 2B | 61 | 69LikelyVery low confidence | — | 63+2 | 6Low | Upgrade | Pro | 162±15.6% · Oct 12 | 151 | 8If 63 (LS 2B)26 LS 2B peers · comparable, not a forecast | 69% | Not enough recent games | ||
 José Rodríguez TOR | RP | 58 | 69LikelyVery low confidence | — | 60+2 | 0Low | Upgrade | Pro | 143±15.6% · Oct 12 | 138 | 54If 60 (LS RP)26 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 69% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Nolan Hoffman KC | RP | 56 | 69LikelyVery low confidence | — | 58+2 | 10Low | Upgrade | Pro | 69±15.6% · Oct 12 | 69⚠ upside-only | 9If 58 (LS RP)no direct sample · comparable, not a forecast | 69% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Brody Hopkins TB | RP | 55 | 69LikelyVery low confidence | — | 57+2 | 10Low | Upgrade | Pro | 102±15.6% · Oct 12 | 102⚠ upside-only | 9If 57 (LS RP)no direct sample · comparable, not a forecast | 69% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Ben Joyce LAA | CP | Bronze72 | 68LikelyVery low confidence | — | 74+2 | 35Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 97±15.6% · Oct 12 | 69 | 70If 74 (LS P)17 LS P peers · comparable, not a forecast | 68% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Garrett Mitchell MIL | CF | Bronze72 | 68LikelyVery low confidence | — | 74+2 | 32Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 78±15.6% · Oct 12 | 39 | 58If 74 (LS CF)9 LS CF peers · comparable, not a forecast | 68% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Ty Madden DET | RP | Bronze71 | 68LikelyVery low confidence | — | 73+2 | 3Low | Upgrade | Pro | 90±15.6% · Oct 12 | 90⚠ upside-only | 64If 73 (LS RP)10 LS RP peers · comparable, not a forecast | 68% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Austin Wells NYY | C | Bronze68 | 68LikelyVery low confidence | — | 70+2 | 26Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 40±15.6% · Oct 12 | 35 | 111If 70 (LS C)11 LS C peers · comparable, not a forecast | 68% | Not enough recent games | ||
 Henry Davis PIT | C | Bronze66 | 68LikelyVery low confidence | — | 68+2 | 21Medium | Upgrade | Pro | 82±15.6% · Oct 12 | 73 | 76If 68 (LS C)9 LS C peers · comparable, not a forecast | 68% | Not enough recent games | ||
373 Silver, Gold & Diamond predictions
These 50 Common & Bronze rows show every prediction column, unlocked — sign in free to search and filter every Common & Bronze card, not just the ones on this page, and to unlock Buy Now on them. Pro adds every rarity above them.
Sign in freeIn MLB The Show 26, a card’s ratings are not fixed. San Diego Studio periodically pushes a roster update that re-rates Live Series cards against what those players have actually done on the field — a hitter on a hot streak gains contact and power, a struggling starter loses control. Between updates nothing moves; at an update, a lot does.
Diamond Radar is the board that tries to call those moves before they land. Every night it re-scores Live Series cards whose players have current-season MLB production to measure — a player who has not taken the field has nothing to compare a card against, so some Live Series cards carry no score in a given window — and it compares that production against the attributes the card currently carries. Where real performance has run ahead of the card, the card is a candidate for an upgrade.
Why that is worth stubs: a card that gets upgraded is a card more people want, and the market prices it accordingly — which is exactly why the useful moment to act is before the update, not after it. That is the whole trade the board is built around, and it is why every row carries prices rather than just a rating. It also cuts the other way: a card the update downgrades is one you would rather not be holding into it.
A prediction is a probability, not a promise. Every past update is graded on the track record, which grades every scored card by Diamond Radar score band against chance: how often any card was upgraded, whatever Radar scored it — so each number can be judged against what it is beating rather than taken on its own.
Upgrade confidence on a 0–100 scale, driven by how far a player’s real MLB production has run ahead of the attributes their card currently carries. It is the board’s default sort, so the rows most likely to move sit at the top.
The Overall the card is predicted to carry after the next update, and the rarity tier that implies — a dash means the card is predicted to stay in the tier it is in. A tier jump is worth reading separately from the Overall it came from, because rarity is what most in-game requirements and collections are written against, so it changes what a card can be for and not only what it rates.
The mirror of Signal: the risk that a card’s attributes get cut because real performance has fallen behind them. Net Outlook combines the two into one read, so a card with real upgrade potential and real downgrade exposure shows as mixed rather than hiding one behind the other.
Three pricing references, in stubs — not three predictions. If no change is the card’s own buy-now price carrying a measured error band — a fair-value anchor for the update doing nothing to it, not a forecast that it will. Downside is where the price lands if a predicted upgrade does not arrive: the pre-hype baseline, shaved for downgrade risk and never taken below what the card would quick-sell for. Some rows carry a ⚠ upside-only mark instead, which means no downside could be established for that card at all — read it as a missing half rather than a small one, because the Value Gap beside it then counts only the upside and understates the risk. Peer value is what other Live Series cards were listing for — a market comparable, not a record of completed sales and not a forecast of this card’s price. Hover a row’s peer value to see where its own number came from: the live peer market as the page loaded, or the scoring run it was priced at, with that run’s date. A row that names neither is one whose provenance we could not read — read it as undated, not as live. Which Overall it compares against depends on the row. A card predicted to upgrade is priced against peers at its predicted Overall, and the cell says “If 81”. A card with no predicted upgrade is priced against peers at its current Overall — the cell says “At 78” — which answers “what do cards like this go for?” and is not a claim that the card will hold that rating. Each row names the group its median was taken over.
Prob. is the upgrade probability the row was priced with. Value Gap applies it: it weighs the comparable price if the upgrade lands against the floor if it does not, at those odds, and reports the result against the price the card was valued at — a live price for Pro, the nightly scoring snapshot for everyone else. Positive means the upside outweighs the downside at that valuation; it is the column that turns a rating prediction into a number of stubs. On an upside-only row there is no downside in the arithmetic at all, so a positive figure there is not the same claim. Hovering the line beneath the badge shows the working for the row you are looking at, rather than asking you to trust the badge.
A periodic re-rating of Live Series cards by San Diego Studio, based on how those players are performing in the real MLB season. Attributes move, Overalls move, and cards can change rarity tier. It is the only routine event that changes what a Live Series card is — which is why the market reprices around it, and why predicting it has value.
It compares a player’s real current-season MLB production against the attributes their card carries today, attribute by attribute rather than against the single headline Overall, and scores the gap. A large, sustained gap in the player’s favour is what drives Signal up. The scoring runs nightly, so a card’s Signal moves as the season does — the 7d column shows that drift.
No. Signal is a ranking of likelihood, not a guarantee, and the board publishes it alongside a downgrade risk for exactly that reason. What can be checked is how the calls have gone historically: the track record grades past predictions against what the updates actually did, window by window.
Most often because it is not a Live Series card — Awards, Spotlight and the other programs do not re-rate at roster updates, so there is nothing to predict. The other common reason is that the player has no current-season MLB production to score against, which leaves the card outside the scored pool for that window rather than scored at zero.
Signed in, a free account holds the complete Common & Bronze slice of the board — not a truncated list of it — with search, filters and sorting running across all of it. Pro opens the same board on every rarity above that. Signed out, this page shows a preview.
Scores are recomputed nightly, so Signal, predicted rating and tier jump change once a day at most. Prices move continuously and are re-polled from the in-game marketplace, which is why a row’s Value Gap can shift during a day its Signal does not.