Originally Posted by HBP
Stubbs could be the definition of that. His actual performance numbers for last years rankings didn't warrant a spot on the top 100 list, yet he was there because of the tools factor.
Overall Stubbs actually player a little worse in 2008. He got a little closer, but not any better.
The CF list was filled with players who generally posted equal to or better than numbers at similar levels when compared to Stubbs and all of them were younger.
The ostrich-sized egg Stubbs laid in the AFL surely factored into the ranking too. Here's his full 2008 with the AFL included:
.265/.355/.404, 555 AB, 95 runs, 39 D, 7 T, 8 HR, 75 RBI, 39-49 SB, 78 BB, 152 K
I think the question looming over him is how long can he keep treading water before he either sinks or swims?