Braves "Kick Tires" on Dozier

[smootness]

For some reason Mallex is criminally underrated within the brave fan community. He performed at all levels in the minors at good ages and showed flashes of his potential when he got into action.

Braves need to look to trade Nick for the best offer out there and play Mallex everyday.

If this is the case, then he's criminally underrated by everyone in baseball.

His production has always been great, the question has simply been whether or not he will be able to hit major league pitching and whether or not his base-stealing ability will fully translate into the majors. There have been legitimate questions around both, which is why his status as a prospect never climbed particularly high.

If he replicates his minor league production, then we got a massive steal, but he'll need to hit somewhere around .280 for that to be the case, and no one is sure if he can do that.

I do agree I'd look to trade Markakis, though, for the simple reason that I like Mallex at least as much for what he does bring to the table and because I don't think Markakis will be a piece of a competitive team once we get there anyway.

 

[clvclv]

For some reason Mallex is criminally underrated within the brave fan community. He performed at all levels in the minors at good ages and showed flashes of his potential when he got into action.

Braves need to look to trade Nick for the best offer out there and play Mallex everyday.

Not sure how anyone could feel that that's the case. There have been plenty of people here all but clamoring for an Inciarte trade to open CF up for Mallex for some time. If that's "criminally underrating" him, he's going to turn into a far better player than anyone here has imagined.

 

[GovClintonTyree]

Mallex in 215 PA was a 0.5 WAR player last year. Muk in 684 PA generated 1.1 WAR.

The usual caveats about sample size, WAR not being perfect, the games being played on the field and not in a spreadsheet, veteran leadership, grit, clutchness and so forth apply.

Thank you for the acknowledgement of grit, leadership and clutchness. If you'd like, I'll assume henceforth when you use WAR shorthand, you are acknowledging all that unmeasurable foolishness.

And based on your data, I will ignore the fact that Muk was a Gold Glove finalist and agree with those who suggest we need to play Mallex and see what we've got.

/lighthearted silliness on the Gold Glove and clutchness stuff

 

[GovClintonTyree]

For some reason Mallex is criminally underrated within the brave fan community. He performed at all levels in the minors at good ages and showed flashes of his potential when he got into action.

Braves need to look to trade Nick for the best offer out there and play Mallex everyday.

I'm a big Mallex guy, but I don't necessarily agree with you here. There's a broad range of opinion on him, and there should be. You and I think he will hit at the ML level, but we don't know yet.

I'd like to find out. If we deal Muk and Smith flops, we go buy (or Peterson) a RF. If he succeeds, then we have a good problem to solve.

 

[nsacpi]

Thank you for the acknowledgement of grit, leadership and clutchness. If you'd like, I'll assume henceforth when you use WAR shorthand, you are acknowledging all that unmeasurable foolishness.

And based on your data, I will ignore the fact that Muk was a Gold Glove finalist and agree with those who suggest we need to play Mallex and see what we've got.

if you could come up with an acronym for my disclaimer...something snappy and memorable like MAGA...i would be forever grateful

 

[GovClintonTyree]

If this is the case, then he's criminally underrated by everyone in baseball. I do agree I'd look to trade Markakis, though, for the simple reason that I like Mallex at least as much for what he does bring to the table and because I don't think Markakis will be a piece of a competitive team once we get there anyway.

where is this mythical table, I wonder?

 

[GovClintonTyree]

if you could come up with an acronym for my disclaimer...something snappy and memorable like MAGA...i would be forever grately

Sample size, WAR not being perfect, the games being played on the field and not in a Spreadsheet, GRit, Clutchness, veteran LEadership, and so forth apply.

SWARSGRICLE

 

[thewupk]

Sample size, WAR not being perfect, the games being played on the field and not in a Spreadsheet, GRit, Clutchness, veteran LEadership, and so forth apply.

SWARSGRICLE

sounds like a disease

 

[nsacpi]

Sample size, WAR not being perfect, the games being played on the field and not in a Spreadsheet, GRit, Clutchness, veteran LEadership, and so forth apply.

SWARSGRICLE

superb!

 

[Horsehide Harry]

If Mallex and Ender both end up being players who produce 3 WAR or more per season, there is absolutely a place for them in the same outfield of a championship caliber team, irregardless of the composition of the rest of the lineup.

Not if the 3 WAR is defense and base running. That isn't how real world baseball works. A few defense and speed guys are fine, that's where you find your 1, 2 and 8 hole hitters on good teams. But, a team full of those type players that is a good team doesn't happen and for good reasons. At some point you have to have players who drive themselves and other player in.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

For some reason Mallex is criminally underrated within the brave fan community. He performed at all levels in the minors at good ages and showed flashes of his potential when he got into action.

Braves need to look to trade Nick for the best offer out there and play Mallex everyday.

I'm all for trading Nick and would be fine playing Mallex there short term. But, unless the Braves find exceptional production out of C and/or 2B, then a good offensive team can't afford to have both Ender and Mallex in the starting OF together. I know about the WAR argument. But, both players would have a significant part of their WAR value tied up in Defense, Base running and speed. This isn't the 1970's or early 1980's where the parks were cavernous and played on plastic.

 

[nsacpi]

Not if the 3 WAR is defense and base running. That isn't how real world baseball works. A few defense and speed guys are fine, that's where you find your 1, 2 and 8 hole hitters on good teams. But, a team full of those type players that is a good team doesn't happen and for good reasons. At some point you have to have players who drive themselves and other player in.

in the extreme you are right...a team of 8 billy hamiltons would probably not be that good...but a team with ender, mallex and oz has a chance to be very good

 

[Horsehide Harry]

I agree and don't get why this is. He has 80 speed, has a history of hitting for average, and has shown he has the ability to take a walk. He's the prototypical leadoff hitter. I see no reason why he can't become a guy who can get on base at a .360+ clip and steal 40+ bases a year. The only issue is where he plays. He can't come close to Ender's defense in center and doesn't have the arm for right. That leaves left field which is a position you like having more power at.

I'd love to find a spot for Mallex but if we can't then we need to make another team pay dearly for him. A young, major league ready CFer who can come in and leadoff for you has a ton of value.

I'm not saying that he's not a good player. I'm saying that a line-up overloaded with LO type hitters doesn't happen and won't happen. In terms of line-up construction: Inciarte - best position LO, Mallex - LO, Albies - LO, Swanson - arguably LO. Now, from an offensive output you can arguably have 3 (maybe 4 if your other 4 position players are unusually productive) at LO, 2nd and 8th. Unless Swanson develops into a much more productive bat or unless the Braves choose not to play Albies at 2B and go with a production bat at 2B, then Mallex is the odd man out.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

in the extreme you are right...a ream of 8 billy hamiltons would probably not be that good...but a team with ender, mallex and oz has a chance to be very good

IF Swanson can show that he's playable as a #3 hole hitter, then you might be able to get by with Mallex. Something along the lines of Inciarte, Albies, Swanson, Freeman, ?, ?, ?, Mallex might be workable IF you're getting really good production from the "?" positions. Otherwise, you will be short offensively.

 

[smootness]

samPlE size, WAR Not beIng perfect, the gameS Being plAyed on the fieLd and not in a spreadsheet, grit, cLutchneSs, veteraN leADership, and So forth apply.

I prefer that one.

 

[smootness]

in the extreme you are right...a team of 8 billy hamiltons would probably not be that good

I'm not so sure. I think it'd be about as good as the WAR would suggest. If you could find that kind of defense at every single defensive position, your run prevention would be incredible. And if you had guys who were that much of a threat on the basepaths and could take that many extra bases, that would help make up for the lack of OBP. It would certainly be a team that would allow few runs and score few runs, but I think they would win as many games as the WAR would suggest they would.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

To me, the conversation is:

Do you play Mallex in the OF and trade for a production 2B like Dozier where Albies goes in trade either as part of the Dozier trade or for some other player?

OR

Do you play Albies at 2B and find your production bats to man LF and RF around Inciarte?

OR

Do you play Mallex in CF and trade inciarte and play Albies at 2B?

The idea of Inciarte, Mallex and Albies all together on the same offense just doesn't work for me unless you have huge production from the other OF position, 3B and C.

Now, if the Braves signed Lucroy, Machado and a guy like Cargo, they would be able to pull together a decent offense: CF Inciarte, SS Swanson, 3B Machado, 1B Freeman, C Lucroy, RF Cargo, LF Mallex, 2B Albies (assuming the Braves can and would spend the big money it would take to add three premium FA over the next 2-3 years). Machado gives you the big RH compliment to pair with Freeman in the middle of the lineup, Lucroy gives you better than average production at catcher and Cargo as well in RF (assuming he plays well away from Coors). If Swanson progresses with the bat to be dangerous enough to be a #3 hitter then so much the better: CF Inciarte, 2B Albies, SS Swanson, 1B Freeman, 3B Machado, RF Cargo, C Lucroy, LF Mallex

But this probably not so much: CF Inciarte, SS Swanson, 3B Moustakas, 1B Freeman, C Lucroy, LF Peterson, RF Mallex, 2B Albies

 

[nsacpi]

To me, the conversation is:

Do you play Mallex in the OF and trade for a production 2B like Dozier where Albies goes in trade either as part of the Dozier trade or for some other player?

OR

Do you play Albies at 2B and find your production bats to man LF and RF around Inciarte?

OR

Do you play Mallex in CF and trade inciarte and play Albies at 2B?

The idea of Inciarte, Mallex and Albies all together on the same offense just doesn't work for me unless you have huge production from the other OF position, 3B and C.

Now, if the Braves signed Lucroy, Machado and a guy like Cargo, they would be able to pull together a decent offense: CF Inciarte, SS Swanson, 3B Machado, 1B Freeman, C Lucroy, RF Cargo, LF Mallex, 2B Albies (assuming the Braves can and would spend the big money it would take to add three premium FA over the next 2-3 years). Machado gives you the big RH compliment to pair with Freeman in the middle of the lineup, Lucroy gives you better than average production at catcher and Cargo as well in RF (assuming he plays well away from Coors). If Swanson progresses with the bat to be dangerous enough to be a #3 hitter then so much the better: CF Inciarte, 2B Albies, SS Swanson, 1B Freeman, 3B Machado, RF Cargo, C Lucroy, LF Mallex

But this probably not so much: CF Inciarte, SS Swanson, 3B Moustakas, 1B Freeman, C Lucroy, LF Peterson, RF Mallex, 2B Albies

I would vote option D. Mallex in left. Ender in center. Albies at second. Peterson on the bench with a fair number of starts against lefties. And a thumper in right.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

I would vote option D. Mallex in left. Ender in center. Albies at second.

And at some point you would get a trade for a guy like Dan Uggla because the team was woefully short on production. You would have guys getting on but not enough getting in and the FO would be forced to make a reactionary move to address the production shortfall, at a sellers expense.

 

[nsacpi]

And at some point you would get a trade for a guy like Dan Uggla because the team was woefully short on production. You would have guys getting on but not enough getting in and the FO would be forced to make a reactionary move to address the production shortfall, at a sellers expense.

it would be below average in power...but not short production