Okay I get it, Correa is really good and really young, a definitive top 10 asset in the game, no argument there. But why does ZIPS project him for multiple 8 WAR seasons? I'm guessing the only real comps here would be A-Rod and Cal Ripken, but not only were those players much better in their first full seasons - Alex Rodriguez put up 9.2 WAR as a 20-21 year old - they were also plus defenders at SS, while Correa thus far in his career (SSS and generally unreliable defensive metrics) has not proven to be one. Not to mention the fact that both of those guys are some of the best players of all time.
Then there's Seager, only 6 months older, putting up better numbers to start his career, and yet the industry consensus appears to be that Correa is the more valuable asset, I don't get this. I understand there are clear arguments from each side here, Corey Seager has relied on very high BABIP, has lower walk rates throughout his professional (MiLB and MLB) career and higher K rates, but one of these guys projects for a higher WAR total than Mike Trout and the other comes in ~a full win lower each year.