Look at Ray Ray Run

The odds that Steele Walker has as many career plate appearances in the MLB as Mazara has had through his age 24 season is probably 10% or less.

But that player you have 2 years of control of is 3 times better at the same age.

This is just batshit. Nomar Mazara is 14 months older than Steele Walker. At Walker's age, Mazara had a 95 wRC+ in the big leagues. Steele Walker just had a 124 wRC+ at A+. Mazara's 95 wRC+ translates to around a 170 wRC+ at A+ - although that scaling isn't perfect for obvious reasons. If you think there's still a lot of development left in Walker solely because he was in A+ while there's no development left for Mazara because he was far too good for A+ at the same age, I really don't know what to say. You can't sit here and dream on Walker who has been 100% worse through the same age, while discounting the ceiling for a guy who was much more advanced at the same age.

Yeah, this adjustment PECOTA made seems to take away some of the penalty for young players that was worked into the models. I like that.

Just to show where people rank: Grandal is projected to be the 4th best player in baseball.

This has been why I have been so confused on some analytics sites grading Robert low. His projections across the board are absurd for a 22 year old; you don't see 3-4 WAR projections for rookies practically ever.

Being in the big leagues at 21 years old is 100% related to ones skills/tools. There's nothing else that drives a player up through the system that quickly.

I view that 1980 list as a glowing endorsement of Mazara's talent and tools/ceiling - not a shot at his production through the age of 24. That list is littered with incredibly talented players who were significantly better than their peers at a very young age. That's an accomplishment on it's own.

He's 24 years old. If he was in AAA raking, people would be infatuated with his tools and upside. Because he has stalled out a bit at the big league level, people want to call him a finished product. Development isn't linear, and there was some underlying growth in Mazara's approach last year. Most guys are developing - whether in college or at A+ ball - at the age of 20/21. Mazara was preparing for his big league debut. That's a lot for some to handle; even moreso for a kid who has to assimilate into a new culture while competing against the best in the world. Mazara may suck, but his upside hasn't changed due to a few stagnated years of big league play. I'm not going to hold getting to the big leagues at 21/22 against Mazara - in fact, I give him huge credit for that. That jump may have been too soon for him, and he may have had things to work out of his game still at a developmental level. He didn't get that chance, so he likely developed some poor habits, and lost some swagger/confidence. The good news is the tools that accelerated him faster than 99% of his peers are still there, and that potential still exists, it's just been clouded behind the challenges of developing in the best league in the world. Unlike most, I give Mazara a lot of credit for being that advanced at that age, and it gives me a lot of hope that his development isn't finished, and a change of scenery may be the best thing for a kid who lost his way a bit on a really difficult and challenging journey.

Robert projected to be a top 25 player in all of baseball.

PECOTA likes Robert more in 2020 than Yoan. Pretty crazy.

What medicals show a guy can handle the grind of pitching 3 out of 4 nights but not starting?

Sexton started off really slow. His past 4 weeks have been impressive. He also grades out positively offensively overall so I wouldn't label him as a negative on that end of the floor. Also, I loved Monta ha.

Yeah, which is a real problem within the game. There is no penalty for spending nothing and profiting endless, but there is a penalty for spending at the top of the bracket. It's very anti-player, and I'm shocked they didn't see this problem beforehand.

Yeah, this was my point above. The market died because everyone was signed by the time the Dodgers made the trade. The demand for COF was already lower than other markets this off-season, and there just weren't enough suitors to maintain the same price demand they had prior.

Yes, and if that happens I will take back everything I said. History isn't on the Red Sox side here though.

Dick, there are a ton of fans who are rationalizing this by saying "The Red Sox couldn't sign Mookie." It's a joke. I've heard fans float the idea that maybe Betts told the Sox he wouldn't sign with them - complete BS, because there's no chance Mookie would give up leverage like that. Fact is, Mookie told them what he wanted in FA and they scoffed at it and decided they didn't want to pay him what he was worth. People are defending it by saying they would have lost him for nothing; completely excusing the fact that there's NO EXCUSE for them not offering Mookie the most money. It's honestly amazing; the ownership PR spin for the last month has clearly worked on some because, in their mind, Mookie was leaving and there was nothing the Red Sox could do about it. We know that's a joke.

The White Sox made the right move by kicking the RF can down the street for another year. Of all the players acquired this off-season, I have a sneaky feeling that the Mazara haters will likely look bad by the end of the year. If they don't look bad, then the Sox bought another year for OF prospects to develop, while still having options on the FA market. I have no issues with the Mazara deal; I didn't at the time, and I still don't. Nearly every rebuild has a come-from-nowhere story of a player developing to a talent level that he was unable to reach before. Mazara may be that piece for the White Sox.

Ozuna is signed for 1 year, and Castellanos can opt out. If he's good enough to be a good sign for the White Sox, he will opt out.

It's one season! Things went their way, it is bound to happen sometimes. I agree the Twins are the best team in the division as of today. I greatly disagree that the Twins in general have a history of maximizing talent - it's just not true. The twins have won nothing.

Red Sox ownership would have been 100% fine paying the repeater tax for years.

Have the Soxtalk people been watching the same Twins team for the past three decades as I have been? I honestly don't think they have, because this Twins envy is comical and this projection of the Twins always maximizing talent is a joke.

1. I want to emphasize something - I never have said WCJ is trash and has no future in the league. In fact, I think he'll be in the league for a long while. My knock on WCJ is that I think his ceiling is far too limited for a team that needed to take risks in the draft to find high ceiling talent. 2. I don't think Sexton has been great by any means; I think he has shown immense progress and development over the last 8 weeks, which is a really good sign given his athletic profile. I still have the same concerns about Sexton as I did before; I am not sure he can run an offense at the NBA level because he doesn't see the floor all that well. He's an undersized 2 as of today, but there's just no denying his offensive talent as a scorer. He could flame out, but I'd rather have that asset than WCJ. 3. While I am not in love with any individual NBA advanced metric - for a multitude of reasons - I do obviously use them and review them. 4. Boylen is what he is; the problem with WCJ is that no one is running sets for bigs anymore, not just Boylen, unless that big is running a pick and pop or pick and roll. WCJ can't shoot well enough from the NBA 3 point line to keep people honest, and I don't think that shot is ever going to come to him which greatly limits his offensive ability because he's not great in the paint with his feet. As for the MPJ comment above; I don't need to see anything else from MPJ. He may get hurt again and his career could end, but the talent is undeniable - as it as at the time. The guy has top 10 NBA player talent, and the Bulls passed because they wanted the safer contributor when the team had no real playoff possibilities. People were optimistic last year about the Bulls - I didn't see it. You have people in here calling Lauri a star; it's nonsense. Lauri is soft, and passive; blaming his lack of bucket attacking on the team pushing out the mid-range J - its complete BS. Lauri moves poorly without the ball, has no sense of post positioning, gets pushed off the block by anyone from a SF to a C, and his pick and pop game sucks because his jumper has betrayed him. He wonders around within the offense, and he doesn't ever exert his strength or play to them. He's been banged up, but that's not going to change because he's SOFT. He's a 7'0 shooting 43% from the field for his career - while shooting under 50% from 2. He was never going to be a great rebounder, but it's still frustrating. This team has one asset and one asset only - Lavine. Everyone else is a dispensable/recyclable piece that has no importance. It's amazing to me that people thought this was a "nice core" last year. The NBA is a star and athleticism driven game. The Bulls have very little.

Disagree 100%. If the Sox have a megastar, they'll move everything else before they move him. I trust this organization to keep a player of that caliber - at least their first go around in FA.