a priest dominated the AFL too

until his age 18 season

I’m making the assumption that Stanton won’t lose power over the next few years. Projecting power in most prospects requires accepting a low bottom-end outcome. This simply isn’t the case for Stanton. Even if his power stays just as it is now and his other skills develop, he’d still be one of the elite power bats in the game. The only possibility for change with any significant likelihood is that he adds more, even if that isn’t particularly likely or isn’t likely he adds a lot more, that’s still a more significant consideration in projection than the idea he might lose some.

This is why ARL matters, because looking at Dunn at 18, you might have guessed that 25-30 HR power was a possible outcome, or more precisely, 8-10% HR/BIA power. It seems very unlikely that this is where Stanton winds up. Of course, we know what happened with Dunn, but the point is projecting about Stanton’s power doesn’t require that level of assumption. Its already there, and its either staying as is, or possibly even improving.

How many people were concerned that Dunn would turn into an atrocious defender when he was a prospect? I bet there weren’t many. He was a lean guy who had good wheels.

This isn’t really the point though. The point is that its unlikely that Stanton goes through such a drastic transformation. It may have been unlikely for Dunn at the time, but that doesn’t make it more likely for Stanton. Isn’t it part of the same transformation that caused Dunn to add power? He got bigger and stronger, at the same time slower, and he probably never had the level of technique and feel Stanton already has. Plus Stanton is already big and strong and a quality defender despite the size and strength. I’m not saying its possible that Stanton’s defense falls off a cliff, but just because it happened to Dunn that doesn’t mean its likely.

I’m not really sure how the second part is supportable, and I’m not sure how raw power wouldn’t change much (not saying that’s not true, but I’ve never seen that suggested or supported with evidence, and it makes little intuitive sense to me, being that a persons body changes so much in their late teens and early 20s). If raw power doesn’t change what exactly do you mean by “raw power”? I mean, once a player hits a certain age I can accept that claim as true, but it seems like raw power is one of the things that is expected to change around Stanton’s age. I feel like we must be defining it two different ways. I’ve always taken HR/FB and HR/BIA to be a pretty strong measure of the concept, at least as far as statistical quantification goes.

Plus, projection is all about accounting for possible outcomes, and it seems like the entire range of possible outcomes where Stanton has considerably less power than Dunn is cut off. There are outcomes where he could have more (See Ryan Howard), even if not many, but at worst its as few as there are outcomes where he has less. I’m not saying I expect him to hit 50 HR every year, but I’d say its more likely that he does than I would have guessed Dunn would at a similar age, or even that Dunn goes on to hit 50 HR for remaining few years of him prime.