I posted this in comments on the blog, but I would never choose a pitcher to "build a team around". They get hurt and just don't stay at their peak all that long, compared to a position player. Obviously, the all time greats do, but projecting all time great status is a fools errand.

i so want to agree with you 100%, but if you're going to talk about their entire careers, arod did more of his damage as a gold-glove caliber shortstop. even if you take into consideration pujols' defensive flexibility (1st, left, 3rd, right, and heck even a cup of coffee at 2b and ss!), despite his troubles moving to 3rd, arod still wins out on defense and speed. plus, earlier in his career, pujols was not a good defender.

and also, in context of the article: who would you build a team around...i still think you go for a hanley, grady, arod, utley type over a pujols (or ortiz + semi-respectable 1b defense) type. in the gm-build-your-team world, it's all about vorp.

oops...arod is leading the world in vorp this year =P

but here you go:

in arod's supposed career year (07), his vorp was 96.6
in pujols' supposed career year (03), his vorp was 98.6

what the? damnit! i going to stop now...

Okay, which one of you pranksters posted as Kevin?

Even for a blog entry, this is pretty poor. Pos is better than this.

Even for a blog entry, this is pretty poor. Pos is better than this.

What's so poor about it? Are you going to give examples, or do you just want to get a shot in?

It is, as you note, just a blog and just his opinion. He does, however, make a fairly valid choice - based on age and demonstrated ability (which is that of an inner-circle HoFer), there aren't many players that a GM should reasonably take ahead of Pujols if they could draft anyone in the league.

For their careers so far, Pujols has been the better hitter, Rodriguez has been the more valuable overall player. Going forward, Pujols figures to be more valuable given their respective ages.

A-Rod is more valuable to the tabloids than Pujols will ever be.

What's so poor about it? Are you going to give examples, or do you just want to get a shot in?


He doesn't mention positional scarcity, he doesn't mention the fact that Pujols has already had some serious injuries, and his arguments against A-Rod and Mauer and Sizemore in the part that follows the quote in the lead-in are just terrible. It reads like the crap you get from your average sportswriter that we rip apart here on a daily basis. Yes, his basic premise that Pujols should be higher than 8th on the list he had is probably correct, but he did a terrible job of supporting that premise. Pos is held to a higher standard than most other sportswriters because we know he is a better writer than them. So no, I wasn't "just trying to get a shot in".

Pujols was moved to 1B primarily to reduce his risk of injury - LaRussa wanted his bat there for 162 games. He was an adequate defensive 3B and a pretty good OF.

-- MWE

He doesn't mention positional scarcity,

He says "And I realize that Pujols plays first base and not a premium middle-of-the-diamond position like Ramirez, Utley, Mauer and Sizemore. Power-hitting first baseman are easier to come by, surely, than middle-infielders with pop."



"and his arguments against A-Rod and Mauer and Sizemore in the part that follows the quote in the lead-in are just terrible. It reads like the crap you get from your average sportswriter that we rip apart here on a daily basis"

I dont think your average sportswriter is mentioning who Mauer's top comp was on Baseball reference.

Edit:

I also know Pujols has been hurt, but would you consider it a "serious injury" when his career low in games played is 143, and every other year he is over 154?

Pujols has already had some serious injuries

Huh? Pujols has been on the DL exactly twice in his career - 2006 and 2008 - and has played in at least 150 games in every other season.

-- MWE

He says "And I realize that Pujols plays first base and not a premium middle-of-the-diamond position like Ramirez, Utley, Mauer and Sizemore. Power-hitting first baseman are easier to come by, surely, than middle-infielders with pop."


Yes, and then he goes on to compare raw offensive numbers of Pujols and A-Rod without any park or position adjustments and concludes that Pujols is better because he has slightly better raw offensive numbers.


I dont think your average sportswriter is mentioning who Mauer's top comp was on Baseball reference.

True, but Pos should know that BB-Ref comps are pretty useless and basically just a toy. Here's his argument against Mauer:

Or Joe Mauer, a player I absolutely love (I thought he was MVP in 2006) but still a young catcher without power, a guy whose No. 2 Baseball-Reference comp after last year was Jason Kendall.*

*Mauer’s No. 1 comp after last year was a catcher from the 1920s and 1930s named Shanty Hogan, who hit .333 in 1928 in his first year for John McGraw and the New York Giants and was, apparently, known for his remarkable appetite. He was apparently nicknamed “Shanty” because at 6-foot-1, 240 he looked like a small hut. God, I love baseball.

Where in there does he make a valid argument against choosing Mauer over Pujols? I'm not saying that one doesn't exist, I'm saying that Pos didn't make one in this entry. That's my major complaint. I already said that he has a decent premise in that Pujols should be higher than 8th on that list. My point was that he didn't do much to support that premise.

Pujols was moved to 1B primarily to reduce his risk of injury - LaRussa wanted his bat there for 162 games. He was an adequate defensive 3B and a pretty good OF.
---
Huh? Pujols has been on the DL exactly twice in his career - 2006 and 2008 - and has played in at least 150 games in every other season.

Why would you move a quality defender to 1B so soon when there wasn't extremely strong evidence necessitating it?

Say La Russa was managing A-Rod when Rodriguez first came into the league. Quick shift to 1B to prevent injury?

I think I'm going to have to side with Randy on this one. Below par article by Joe's standards. It seemed like a lot of the arguments he made were basically: Dude we're talking about effing Albert Pujols here.

I expect better from Joe.

Why would you move a quality defender to 1B so soon when there wasn't extremely strong evidence necessitating it?

Pujols has had elbow problems for years, and he continues to play through pain. Obviously it doesn't affect his bat, but one of the reasons he plays 1B is so he won't have to throw across the diamond.

Pujols has had elbow problems for years, and he continues to play through pain. Obviously it doesn't affect his bat, but one of the reasons he plays 1B is so he won't have to throw across the diamond.

He also has a recurring problem with his foot. I think it's planar fasciitis, which is an incredibly painful thing to play through - it's one of the things which helped put McGwire into retirement.

To me, it's actually slightly more amazing that he could put up these numbers with these physical ailments.

True, but Pos should know that BB-Ref comps are pretty useless and basically just a toy.

While they are largely a toy, I thought the major complaint was that they were severely flawed when comparing across different eras, while being somewhat better for in-era comparisons. In the case of Kendall and Mauer, while their careers do not perfectly match, they both occurred during the same general timespan and offensive conditions.

Also, thanks for the clarification on why you didn't like the article.

But Pujols has had a better-than-150 OPS+ EVERY SINGLE YEAR OF HIS EIGHT-YEAR CAREER. Babe Ruth didn’t do that his first eight years as a hitter. Barry Bonds didn’t do that. Joe DiMaggio didn’t, Willie Mays didn’t, Hank Aaron didn’t, Honus Wagner didn’t and so on.

That's not fair. Different careers have different shape.

The only early years in which Babe Ruth didn't have a 150 OPS+ were as a 19 year old with a cup of coffee and as a 21 year old with 326 IP. If you start his clock for "as a hitter" ticking in 1920 (or 1918) you do run into his illness-blighted 1925, but with so many > 200 OPS+ years around that ...

The great stories of Honus Wagner and Barry Bonds are that that grew so dramatically from what they were when they were 21 or 23 - their earliest years are among their weakest. They didn't come into the league as what they would eventually become.

Ty Cobb had partial seasons at the ages of 18 and 19; once he became a full-timer at the age of 20, he had 13 consecutive > 160 OPS+ seasons. (Remember that Pujols started at age 21.)

Jimmy Foxx had three brief partial years at the ages of 17-19; once he became mostly a regular at the age of 20, he then had at least a 140 OPS+ for the next 9 years, although he did narrowly miss 150 twice.

Ted Williams blew into the league at the age of 20 as something pretty close to fully developed; he then exceeded 150 OPS+ (make that 160) for the first 17 years of his career, falling below that only at the age of 40.

Stan Musial (you can't talk about El Hombre without also mentioning The Man) had a 134 OPS+ off year in 1947, his fifth full season, but otherwise had a very long string of 150 OPS+ years.

Mel Ott had his first 150 OPS+ year at the age of 20; once that happened, he exceeded 150 in 10 of the next 11 years and 12 of the next 14.

Frank Thomas had 8 consecutive 150 OPS+ years (in fact, they were all at least 170) to start his career. He's been a much lesser hitter since then.

Mickey Mantle had a 117 OPS+ half season at the age of 19 and a 143 at the age of 21; other than that, he exceeded 150 every year from age 20 through age 32.

Every example I've given has been of a great, great hitter, so I'm absolutely not disputing the point that Pujols is a great hitter. But has he yet proven that he's a greater hitter than Frank Thomas? If he can simply avoid declining as fast as Thomas did, he probably will be, but can you say he's there yet?

Why would you move a quality defender to 1B so soon when there wasn't extremely strong evidence necessitating it?

Scott Rolen was a very good 1b.

That's not fair. Different careers have different shape.

Life's not fair.

The point is not that Pujols is the best hitter ever through 8 seasons, nor is it that Pujols is more valuable (going forward) than younger sluggers who play premium positions, nor is it that Pujols in his 2003-2006 peak was better than A-Rod at his SS peak.

The point is that in 2008, Joe Posnanski would take Pujols over A-Rod for a plethora of reasons that can't completely be summed up with shiny performance metrics or position scarcity analysis.

He is one of those players who is great when you see him once, greater still when you see him every day, greater beyond even that if you share the bench with him.

I don't care if you like Pujols > ARod or ARod > Pujols. Doesn't matter. Either way, to say that Pujols is under-rated is silly. Unless you mean that he didn't get voted to the all-star team by the fans. But he didn't say that.

The point is that in 2008, Joe Posnanski would take Pujols over A-Rod for a plethora of reasons that can't completely be summed up with shiny performance metrics or position scarcity analysis.

He is one of those players who is great when you see him once, greater still when you see him every day, greater beyond even that if you share the bench with him.

The quoted part above reads like something that a someone would write about Derek Jeter and then get ripped on here for writing.

If that is really what Pos was going for with this entry (I don't think it is btw) then I take back what I said about him having a decent premise and supporting it poorly, as he then has a terrible premise that he supported poorly.

While they are largely a toy, I thought the major complaint was that they were severely flawed when comparing across different eras, while being somewhat better for in-era comparisons. In the case of Kendall and Mauer, while their careers do not perfectly match, they both occurred during the same general timespan and offensive conditions.

Yes, but Pos doesn't mention that he is talking about similar batters through age 24, not overall most similar batters.
Kendall through age 24:
.300/.372/.401 101 OPS+
.294/.391/.434 114
.327/.411/.473 131

Kendall was a damn good player til he got hurt. High OBP, moderate power. Those are excellent numbers for a catcher. The comparison to Kendall was to show that Mauer doesn't hit for enough power to be considered elite since everyone knows that Kendall is nothing more than a slap hitter...now. It seems clear to me at least that he intentionally neglected to mention that the BB-Ref comparable list was only looking at Kendall up to his age 24 season when he did have decent though not great power.

Do people who say Pujols was not a good fielder early in his career know what they are talking about? the guy was rated as a gold glove defender in the minors at third base, played the outfield and only his raw speed kept him from being considered above average, at third he showed signs of being very good, and everyone that saw him play, said he will win a gold glove someday at third. When your team acquires Scott Rolen, you move whoever you have at third off of third. He didn't move off of third because he wasn't good, he moved off of third because Rolen is probably one of the three best defenders of all time.

Kendall was a damn good player til he got hurt. High OBP, moderate power. Those are excellent numbers for a catcher. The comparison to Kendall was to show that Mauer doesn't hit for enough power to be considered elite since everyone knows that Kendall is nothing more than a slap hitter...now. It seems clear to me at least that he intentionally neglected to mention that the BB-Ref comparable list was only looking at Kendall up to his age 24 season when he did have decent though not great power.

I was thinking the comparison was to show that catchers don't age well, and history is against Mauer.(wouldn't be the first time)

I was thinking the comparison was to show that catchers don't age well, and history is against Mauer.(wouldn't be the first time)

Then why didn't he say that instead of bringing up a misleading comparison to Jason Kendall?

"For their careers so far, Pujols has been the better hitter, Rodriguez has been the more valuable overall player."

Damn, someone else wrote that already.

Even if one considered them equally skilled defensively for their positions, the fact remains that my A-Rod team also has a 1B in the lineup. The Pujols team counters with a SS (and later a 3B instead). So my team figures to be better, because I likely have a better hitter added to the lineup.

It would be more interesting if A-Rod was a terrible defensive SS, and Pujols was a Keith Hernandez-type over there. Pujols' D is good, but not THAT good.

Pujols' D is good, but not THAT good.

As noted above, Pujols was good enough to comfortably handle 3rd - the progressive movement to 1B has been a combination of Rolen at 3B, and then the concern over Pujols elbow ligament.

Also, wasn't his defense at 1B rated at something obscene like 20 runs/plays above average? I seem to remember the metrics showing him as a hugely above average 1B - not Keith levels, but just a tier below (as opposed to most 1B, who are about 5-10 tiers below).

Edit: For reference , please see Chris Dial's in-season NL defensive stats, and associated comments.

Then why didn't he say that instead of bringing up a misleading comparison to Jason Kendall?

Even before the ankle injury, and the thumb injury, was Kendall the sort of player who you would pick to start your team? While he was very good, and a legit all-star, there were all sorts of other players who outperformed him, even when position was considered. Mauer is the same - he's very good, and among the top at his position, but he still doesn't hit for enough to justify him over someone like Pujols, even when positional scarcity is considered.

The quoted part above reads like something that a someone would write about Derek Jeter and then get ripped on here for writing.

if you like that, you'll love this...

Second, I remember once talking to one guy on the Cardinals and asking him what Pujols was like as a teammate. He went on and on about how the guy always came through, how his work ethic was insane, how he cared only about winning. Then he said something that’s really special, if you think about it. He said: “Albert is so good that you feel like you let him down when you screw up.” I thought that had to be the ultimate line that could ever be said about a ballplayer. I build my baseball team around that ballplayer.

You can belittle anecdotal quips like this as nonsense, but if you confine your view to absolutisms you're not going to see the whole picture.

By any specific metric, there's likely a better answer than Pujols - but across the board (name your hitting stat, peak, career, postseason, defense, intangibles) Pujols consistently rates near the top like no one else.

Personally I think Pujols is rated just right. Players like A-Rod and Jeter are naturally over-rated playing in the media capital of NYC, but that's nothing new.

Even before the ankle injury, and the thumb injury, was Kendall the sort of player who you would pick to start your team? While he was very good, and a legit all-star, there were all sorts of other players who outperformed him, even when position was considered. Mauer is the same - he's very good, and among the top at his position, but he still doesn't hit for enough to justify him over someone like Pujols, even when positional scarcity is considered.

Mauer is and has been better than Kendall ever was. I didn't say Mauer was better than Pujols or should be taken before Pujols or anything like that. I said that Pos's arguments were intentionally misleading and poor.

I don't think Pujols is generally underrated--he just doesn't get discussed as much in the mainstream media.

Aside from stats, A-Rod has two things nudging him ahead of Pujols in the celebrity department:

1) He plays for the Yankees.

2) He has the largest contract in sports history.

This isn't to say A-Rod deserves to be more famous. Everyone who plays for the Yankees would be less famous if they played for the Cardinals, or just about any other team except the Red Sox.

Poz's problem is that he's confusing celebrity with rating.

Pos is in China covering the Olympics. It's possible that at this moment he has more important things on his plate than a rigorous analysis of why baseball GMs are idiots about Albert Pujols. I think that, given the circumstances and the fact that he is only the best baseball writer on the internet, I can give him a pass here.

On projecting out Pujols, it appears that he will probably stay a regular though 39, get 3300+ hits, 700 doubles, and over 500 home runs.

So right now, it's a bit baffling to not see Pujols out to hit 700+ home runs. But his home run totals for what should be his peak years are surprisingly low.

So, Pujols peak years rank below the peak years of Gehrig, Foxx, Mize, Thomas, McCovey, McGwire, Greenberg, about even with Bagwell? Do Anson, Brouthers, Connor, and Leonard have arguments?

Pujols has walked twice as often as he's struck out so far this year.

That's incredible.

It should be interesting to see who is most comparable with Pujols after this year, since DiMaggio went to war after his age27 year.

I wonder how many more good pitches Pujols could have seen if the Cardinals decided to go for Manny Ramirez. (Although I think that means they have to use a Ramirez, Ankiel, Ludwick outfield)

Being compared to Jason Kendall is hardly an insult! Sure, he sucks now, but Kendall was an absolutely brilliant player with Pittsburgh, a bona fide superstar through the year 2000, who then had two nice bounceback seasons in 03-04. Given how athletic and durable he was for a catcher (and, therefore, how likely he was to age well relative to the positional norm), I definitely would have said Kendall was on track for a Hall of Fame career after the 2000 season, and maybe again after he left Pittsburgh with two more consecutive All-Star-type seasons under his belt. I do NOT think Beane erred by acquiring him; I think he simply had an Andruw Jones-style collapse (which, of course, is always a risk for catchers). Catchers who accumulated over 10 of my WARP from 1997-2004:

1. Iván Rodríguez, 34.8
2. Mike Piazza, 34.3
3. Jason Kendall, 27.6
4. Jorge Posada, 26.7
5. Javy López, 22.4
6. Mike Lieberthal, 15.9
7. Charles Johnson, 14.4
8. Jason Varitek, 11.8
9. Paul LoDuca, 11.5

Kendall was indeed very fine and not a bad comp for Mauer at all. The main difference is that Kendall was worked VERY hard as a C. When the trade to Oakland happened, I took a close look at him. If memory serves, he had the 8th most games caught through age 30 in history. And he's actually aged better than any of the guys ahead of him on that list. Oh wait, Pudge must have been on that list. (Interestingly, neither Fisk nor Boone was on the list.) So far, Mauer hasn't had more than 120 games caught in any single season. Granted, given his young start, he's still got a good chance at 1000+ games caught through age 30 which probably wouldn't bode well.

I like Sizemore a lot but he looks more like Carlos Beltran than "the player I would build a team around." Obviously he (like Beltran) is A player you could build a team around but I wouldn't choose him #1. Would I take Pujols? I just might -- I've been saying for years now that he looks like one of the all-time great hitters and I expect him to age extremely well.

For a reasonable Pujols vs. all-time greats comparison, I think this is reasonable -- ages 21-28, 4000+ PA, by OPS+. He's #10 all-time at 169 and only one player ahead of him had more PA (and only 3 behind him in the top 25) -- I know, most of them were playing shorter seasons. The only contemporary player ahead of him is Thomas; he's 13 points ahead of Griffey (how soon we forget), 14 ahead of Bonds, 17 ahead of Manny, 19 ahead of Vlad and 25 ahead of AROD.

Based on that top 25, the worst-case scenarios appear to be Dick Allen (761 games with an OPS+ of 149 post-28), Ken Griffey (1110 games, 124 OPS+), or Will Clark (928 games, 125 OPS+). And all those guys are behind Pujols on the list so we'd expect even his worst-case to be better than those. Really, it's amazing how well all those guys aged. I don't even think there are any notable injury flameouts -- even Darryl Strawberry managed over 1200 games and a 144 OPS+ after age 28. I suppose Allen in his way but that's still 5 full seasons' worth of games.

By the way, the "diminished" Frank Thomas post-28 has 1372 games with a 140 OPS+ -- that's George Brett ages 21-28. I think I'd be OK with Pujols giving me that, with average to good defense, over the next 10 years. :-)

And I have to say that, at the time, I had no freaking idea that Rusty Staub was that good of a hitter. I find it hard to remember now.

And what is it with CF? Cobb, Mantle, Speaker, Mays, DiMaggio, Griffey are all in the top 25.

Anyway, let's just say that I fully expect that Pujols will still be such a good hitter at age 40 that JP Ricciardi will release him (from his fantasy team presumably).

I like Sizemore a lot but he looks more like Carlos Beltran than "the player I would build a team around." Obviously he (like Beltran) is A player you could build a team around but I wouldn't choose him #1. Would I take Pujols? I just might -- I've been saying for years now that he looks like one of the all-time great hitters and I expect him to age extremely well.

I don't know...I'm inclined to believe that Sizemore is a better player than Beltran and while he's of the same type...he's better at being that type.

Carlos Beltrán was a legitimate MVP candidate just two years ago. Let's not write the guy off here...

I had no freaking idea that Rusty Staub was that good of a hitter.

Post WW-II not-yet-elected LF/RF/1B on the 2008 Hall of Merit ballot:

4. Reggie Smith
15. Ken Singleton
16. Tony Perez
25. Lou Brock
29. Albert Belle
31. Norm Cash
32. Bobby Bonds
36. Rusty Staub
48. Orlando Cepeda
73. Jim Rice
75. Tony Oliva
78. Dave Parker
80. Frank Howard
83. Brian Downing
84. Jose Canseco
85. Don Mattingly
86. Jack Clark
104. Harold Baines

He hasn't gone completely unnoticed. When the next interminable Jim Rice debate fires up and you're tired of all the comps you've been using, try bringing up Staub.

Sizemore is running away with the merit-based AL MVP this year, and in terms of talent is the second best player in the AL right now after ARod (and may well pass ARod soon). He just turned 26. I don't know if I would take him over Pujols the next 5 years, but it is not crazy, especially given Pujols' health issues, to do so.