An 82 is a godly value for a player of his age.
On what basis you're saying this ?
I rate players as I see them playing, regardless of their age. He was one of the most responsive elements on the field and therefore gets a relatively high value, it doesn't really matter if he's 15 years old or 35.
It's a very flawed way to rate players anyway. Young players make a difference on the field with their reflexes
, vitality, enthusiasm and ardor all the contrary of older guys. If we had to link response with age, it would be the old players (+34) who should have lower values, reflexes worsen while aging, it's actually a scientific fact.
(I know you're sick of that smiley
) But yet again, players should be rated solely on their display/capabilities regardless of their age although it's very rare to see a young player with high values in teamwork for instance, the unique way to improve yourself in this area is accumulating games and gathering experience.
Young footballers are "excessively responsive" at times, they dispute every ball, they leave their position
to enter in a duel despite the presence/engagement of one of their teammates in that area on the pitch. While they gain experience, they'll play in a smarter way
and they learn how to manage and distribute their efforts all along the 90 minutes and even the season, they gradually discover what to do and what not. Which situations are advantageous and which not...
Let's talk about the pair of American players : Beasley and Donovan, are they more responsive (today) than the amazingly swift guys we saw in 2002 ? HELL NOT !