serghei
Senior Member
Plenty of CB didn't develop that much physically the way Stones did, and while adding strength is probable, it is unlikely he will gain height and athletic ability.
There is also the point that @Andresito made, development isn't linear for everyone. You can point to players who played their best at late 20's (very few are at their best at early 30's, it is usually end of their prime) but there is also early blommers. A guy like De Ligt looked even better than Cubarsi at 18, and at 26 there is 2 big clubs that were glad to find a decent sale for him.
So, it isn't a sure thing that he will be the best CB or even top 5 when he peaks. There might be players who are far worse now that might end up better, or not.
Absolutely, but I don't see the big fuss even at young talent either. That Levante player turned him around like a pancake. A very suspect player defensively. He'd get little to no playing time in normal condition at a club like Barca.
Good for his age... means jack shit to me. So he's less bad than a normal 17 year old. Big deal. 17-21 is an age for accumulation for young players. The good or bad metric that counts at this stage is how much or if you progress at all so you can become a top player. There is no such thing as top player for his age, it's a fan-made concept.
In fact, getting credit before you earn it as a young player, using age as the main factor, could argued as a disadvantage during the development stage of these players.
Last edited:
