How much of this "leadership" and "maturity" stuff really matters? Understandably he has to be a very good player for those things to really matter, but is there any tangible value in those things? Has Derek Jeter been so good because of those qualities or is he just a really damn good baseball player? I'm sure there's really no way you can analyze it, but it's becoming pretty commonplace for every story or writeup on Almora to focus on those things. Instead, can't they just say that his ceiling is a GG CF who wins the batting title and puts out a couple of 6+ WAR seasons? Then again, if Almora and Baez turn into Toews and Kane, I can deal with the narrative a heck of a lot better. I think the FO buys into the maturity and those types of qualities having some real level of impact on the likelihood of a player developing and fulfilling potential. Fair enough, but in baseball, I'd still rather have A-Rod than Jeter, despite the large gap in maturity/leadership or whatever you want to call it. He's just a better overall player and would have had an even more legendary career if he was on a team where he could have stayed at SS another 5 years. The individuality of the sport still generally rewards talent over maturity, particularly in an offensive player, though, obviously you'd like to have the combination of both. Unfortunately, the Cubs have a player that could be dis-proving my theory right now in Castro. Let's hope not.