Why Busy MLB Offseasons Don’t Guarantee 2026 Success

Bradford Doolittle digs into MLB’s 2025–26 offseason, sorting teams into tiers by last season’s results and how much they shook up their rosters. He focuses a lot on Brian Cashman’s “run it back” mantra, pointing out that the Yankees’ pretty quiet winter still left them with a solid core—about 85% intact—even though the previous offseason saw a lot more turnover at 69%.

The study lays out how contenders who either “run it back” or chase a major free agent stack up, and what happens when teams either stand pat or blow things up. Doolittle looks at how these approaches play out in wins and championships.

Contenders who run it back but still sign a major free agent

Doolittle’s framework finds that teams keeping most of their core but adding a big-name free agent usually see a bit of regression, but they still have a real shot at a title. Teams like the Yankees, Phillies, Dodgers, Cubs, and Tigers fit this “run it back and add” group. The idea is that having continuity, plus a smart upgrade, can get you a trophy—even if the season’s a little bumpy.

Why this approach remains defensible

Continuity gives a team a solid base, and one big addition can unlock the potential that’s already there. Doolittle puts numbers to this, measuring how stable teams stay and how likely they are to get back into the title mix. Sometimes, just keeping what works and adding the last missing piece is the best play.

Stand-pat contenders: modest declines avoidable with a steady core

Some clubs just stick with what they’ve got, trusting their roster and farm system to keep them in the hunt. The Brewers, Mariners, and Blue Jays are classic examples here. History says these stand-pat teams usually only see small dips, not big collapses, if health and depth hold up.

The expectation is that these teams stay in the mix, even if they don’t chase a flashy addition.

What history says about standing pat

Long-term continuity can help a team weather a season, but skipping upgrades leaves some risk. If rivals get better or injuries hit, regression can sneak in. It’s a tricky balance—keeping chemistry is great, but the right upgrade, at the right moment, can really boost a team’s chances.

Active overhauls that backfire: the danger of wholesale churn

Doolittle also points out that teams making sweeping changes without a clear fit often take the biggest hits. He calls out the Red Sox as a warning—lots of moves, but not much to show for it. More moves don’t always mean better results; it’s about quality, fit, and blending new faces with old.

Strategic lessons from overhauls

Teams that chase big, fast makeovers can lose their timing and chemistry, leading to fewer projected wins and fewer titles. Doolittle says, unless a team lines up talent, health, and chemistry, a drastic shift can do more harm than good.

Mid-tier teams: mixed tactics, mixed results

The middle tier’s all over the place. Some go for moderate changes without landing stars (the Mets), some chase small improvements (the Giants, Rays), while others hope their core bounces back (the Braves, Guardians, Astros).

It really comes down to context—how a team’s health, depth, young talent, finances, and timing all line up. That mix often matters more than one big move.

How this tier tends to play out

Across 18 types, Doolittle tracks average win changes and title odds. Careful, low-drama tweaks usually beat out full-blown overhauls. Sometimes, just respecting the core and making smart, gentle changes is the path to stability—and maybe, just maybe, a title run.

Poor teams: varied strategies with uneven historical payoffs

Down at the bottom, teams try everything. Some rebuild hard without big signings (White Sox, Nationals). Others make small tweaks, hoping to rebound (Orioles, Twins).

The results are all over the place. Luck, timing, and how well a rebuild’s managed really decide how fast a team can climb back to relevance.

Continuity and context matter, even in rebuilding plans

Doolittle points out that continuity scores help us spot real roster stability, not just teams standing still. He follows multiyear trends—like how Philadelphia’s had a longer window, while New York keeps actively tweaking its lineup.

Context really drives success. “Running it back” makes sense for contenders, but everything depends on execution, health, and whether teams actually add the right pieces when it matters.

 
Here is the source article for this story: MLB 2026: Why busy winters don’t always mean winning summers