Mike Malott

says plainly he is staying away

Takes a shot well and hits with real power, with a notably strong counter-striking game, good range control, a very good kick, and good combination of punches and kicks -- though his own defense is said to drop off once an opponent closes that range. Good wrestling with good takedown defense and a sneaky, fast-attacking submission game, with takedowns kept as a secondary option behind his striking.

Repeats the pick three times ('I'm going to take Burns', 'Give me Gilbert Burns') despite calling him a big underdog; no qualifier attaches to the win itself.

A good striker who controls range well and counters effectively, with good power, a good leg kick and the ability to combine punches and kicks; he nonetheless gets hit more than his range control would suggest. His grappling is also good -- solid takedown defense and sneaky, quickly-initiated submission attacks -- but the analyst thinks his best path to winning is to keep the fight standing rather than grapple with Burns.

Self-rated directly: 'very low confidence pick' -- the clearest first-person confidence statement on the card.

A well-rounded striker with pop in both hands and kicks, solid counter work, good range control and a nicely set-up leg kick, putting combinations together well. His striking defense leaves something to be desired but he has generally been able to absorb punches; a prior finish loss came via ground-and-pound rather than a striking knockout. A good grappler with good takedown defense, good takedowns and sneaky, quickly-attacked submissions.

He admits he wavers on this pick, gives round one to Malott and calls round two close, but settles on Radtke for grit, predicting either a late finish or a decision in Radtke's favor.

A good striker who controls range well and counters effectively, with solid leg kicks and the ability to combine punches and kicks. His striking defense is called a bit lacking, mirroring the same note given to his opponent. On the mat his takedown defense is called really good and he is credited with opportunistic submissions; the analyst suggests any grappling exchange would likely be on his own terms.

names Malott plainly as the pick with a stated mechanism (more output on the feet despite worse striking defense); the one real risk he names -- fading late the way Malott did in a past fight -- is explicitly rebutted (this opponent is not that caliber of threat, and he frames the past fade as a lesson learned), which is the rebutted-route pattern that holds at clear rather than demoting.

A very good offensive striker: real power, good counter-striking, strong range control, and fluid punch-kick combinations. His striking defense is lacking, so he is expected to absorb jabs and take some facial damage, though not likely to be finished by one. Good takedown defense plus crafty, quick submission attacks round out his grappling. The main concern raised is conditioning: he faded hard and gassed out late against Neil Magny, a fighter credited as genuinely good, not a given opponent -- the analyst frames this fight as a strong bounce-back spot rather than a repeat risk.

He uses the word 'lean' explicitly, twice, for Malott, and calls the matchup closer than the betting line suggests; real reasoning follows (home-crowd boost, expects the striking gap to close, a finish inside two rounds) but the hedged framing throughout keeps this below 'clear'.

Mike Malott is a good power/counter-striker with good range control and a good leg kick, operating at a real reach disadvantage (73\" vs Magny's 80\") against a much longer opponent, backed by a good, crafty, quick submission game and good takedown defense; the analyst expects his striking to adapt to the range problem as the fight goes on.

A moderate lean toward Malott on recent form, paired with an explicit acknowledgment that picking the other side would be reasonable, and a stated preference to play the under rather than either corner.

Mike Malott is read as a technical, counter-based striker with range control and a sharp leg kick, backed by good wrestling with good takedown defense and crafty, quick submissions on the ground (front chokes off takedown attempts, limb attacks). His own striking defense is explicitly called not the best, which the analyst flags as a mutual issue in this matchup rather than a one-sided hole. The pick leans his way mainly on recent form, with the analyst explicitly noting he hasn't faced the best competition while still liking how he's looked doing it.

He opens by saying he sees a real, two-way route to winning for each man before settling on Malott for having more routes to the win; the pick is real but the fight is explicitly treated as competitive both ways, and he will not bet the win market at all given the price.

A technical striker with real counter-punching -- he has scored knockdowns off counters before, including against a named prior opponent -- but a striking defense that lets him get hit, with an exposed chin. If the fight hits the mat he is the much better grappler, with crafty, submission-heavy BJJ and a good-sized toolbox, taking the dominant position quickly.