Albert Pujols vs. Alex Rodriguez

[The Edge]

I have no idea why but OS wanted this posted using "my stats."

I personally don't feel there is much at all to debate but here is what I would use to try to make a case for both sides which I feel Pujols wins rather handily.

This is the first 11 years of each player's pro careers. This does not count Arod's partial years prior to 1996.

Pujols:
2073 Hits
455 Doubles
445 HRs
.328 Average
.430 wOBA
167 wRC+
13.1 BB%
9.5 K%
2nd best 1B from 2001-present among qualifying stats based off Fangraphs DRS off UZR/TZR.

Arod:
2023 HIts
459 HR
358 Doubles
.308 average
.413 wOBA
150 wRC+
10.7 BB%
17.7 K %
84.6 WAR
IN the time, statistically 11th best defensive shortstop of qualifying players from 1996-2006 basing off of Fangraphs DRS based off UZR/TZR.


I don't feel this is even close to debate. The only thing going for Arod I think is that he played SS for a while which is an offensively inept position for the most part.

[RickD]

I have to agree with Edge. Hands down, Pujols is better and the man I would rather have playing for the Yankees.

[OutfieldGrass]

When I look at the debate I have a hard time not taking into account the combination of Pujols and a league average SS vs Arod and a league average 1B. Yes, Pujols is good and statistically speaking his numbers are better. I don't want to take away from that.

For me I look at roster creation. Arod at SS is the player I would go with as I would have an easier time filling 1B than I would SS.

[winningbaseball]

I'll stick with Jeter at shortstop over all three to lead my team, but of the two remaining it would be Pujols over Arod for the simple fact (as of to this point) he did not cheat the game.

[WilsonC]

This is actually an interesting comparison. The first point is that there's no meaningful difference in playing time - A-Rod averaged about 153 games per season and Pujols 155, which is about as close as you can expect over an extended time period. That makes it nice and convenient since we can ignore playing time differences and focus purely on their quality.

There's two factors here that should be pretty obvious in comparing the two:
1. Pujols was clearly the better hitter, and
2. A-Rod gains a lot more value from the positional difference.

Any honest look will lead you to those same conclusions. But what about the rest of their games?

A big challenge in comparing the two concerns the quality of their defense. To illustrate where the difficulty is, I'll contrast the two major versions of WAR: the one from Baseball Reference (rWAR) and the one from Fangraphs (fWAR).

First, let's look at rWAR. Over the 11 years in question, A-Rod tallied 80.5 WAR under this system, compared to Pujols' 88.7. That's not a huge difference (it amounts to a little under 1.0 WAR per season) but it's a clear one. The question is, why the difference?

rWAR shows the separation of offense and defense, listed under oWAR and dWAR. It's worth noting that this system handles position as an offensive advantage - it looks at the offense a player provides relative to his position rather than estimating the defensive worth of the positions - and under that assumption A-Rod actually edges Pujols out offensively (81.1 to 77.4). Pujols comes out well ahead in terms of pure batting unadjusted by position (659 to 458) but between the speed stats (A-Rod gains over 40 runs on Pujols through baserunning and staying out of double plays) and the position, it sees A-Rod as having the sight edge here.

Defensively, on the other hand, the system it uses sees A-Rod as essentially average (or about 22 runs above average at SS, but very poor at 3B) while it loves Pujols defensively (114 runs above average at the position).

Overall, the statement rWAR makes is that they're comparable offensive weapons when you adjust for position, but Pujols played his position much better than A-Rod, again relative to their peers.

Fangraphs is a little muddier, though. Again, Pujols comes out on top, but by a smaller margin (87.8 to 84.6) to the point that it's inconclusive. When we dig a little deeper, something stands out: 2002 is the year where fWAR starts using UZR, widely seen as the better defensive metric in years it's available (both use the same TZ metric prior to that), and it's also the year that baserunning data (beyond SB) starts being included.

We don't have data for A-Rod's baserunning in Seatle, so he gets a null value for that. Given that he's been about 10 runs above average since 2002 (including the injury-prone years) it's conservative to expect that he added another WAR during the years when his speed was at its peak. That closes the gap a little bit, but Pujols is a pretty good baserunner too, and SB values are included elsewhere.

What about defense, though? UZR agrees with TZ in that Pujols rates as an excellent fielder, but his defensive impact is nonetheless quite a bit lower in this system (64.9). On the other hand, during the years in which we have both defensive metrics, A-Rod's UZR has typically been better than his TZ - his 12.8 and 12.4 UZR ratings as a SS in 2002 and 2002 each give him more value than his combined TZ ratings (1 and 8) during the same years, and his first two years as a 3B, his 8.2 and -0.1 UZR ratings are much better than his 3 and -11 TZ ratings. Only in 2006 did they agree he had a terrible defensive year (-14.1 and -12) which isn't surprising considering it was the year of his much-publicized defensive struggles.

So basically, we have A-Rod gaining 19 UZR runs defensively in 5 years split between SS and 3B in spite of a bad year, compared to losing 10 TZ runs in those same years, for a 29 run split. That's a huge defensive difference. Particularly of note in there is the difference in his SS years. We certainly can't assume that the pattern of his UZR outperforming his TZ would hold true for his early years, but it should certainly make us pause before drawing conclusions about his defense; if A-Rod really was anywhere near the SS that UZR thought he was in those years, I'd take him easily as the better player over the first 11 years of their respective careers. It's unlikely he was that good, but given the UZR data we do have I'd say there's a reasonable possibility that he was a better defensive SS than TZ suggests.

Put a gun to my head and I'd probably still go Pujols, but given the overall data we have on their defense, it's inconclusive.

[RickD]

What he said!

Seriously the data you produce on a regular basis WilsonC is just amazing.

[astrosfanatic]

I'll stick with Jeter at shortstop over all three to lead my team, but of the two remaining it would be Pujols over Arod for the simple fact (as of to this point) he did not cheat the game.

That we know of....

I like Outfield's view on it...A-Rod plus avg 1B would probably be a better deal than Pujols plus avg SS...

[Old Sweater]

I also went along with what OutfieldGrass said and then Wilson spun some good numbers on it. It's like value of SS/3B vs 1B. Pujols isn't the overwhelming favorite one would think looking at the raw batting numbers. I do think that Pujols brings a lot more to the clubhouse/dugout then A Rod, that other players can feed off, but I guess only the teammates know for sure.

My ultimate pro award does go to Jeter but he can't put a team on his back and carry them like Pujols or A Rod. Not enough bat and is a very average fielding SS.

[Old Sweater]

What he said!

Seriously the data you produce on a regular basis WilsonC is just amazing.

Ain't it! Clear as a bell also.

[The Edge]

I also went along with what OutfieldGrass said and then Wilson spun some good numbers on it. It's like value of SS/3B vs 1B. Pujols isn't the overwhelming favorite one would think looking at the raw batting numbers. I do think that Pujols brings a lot more to the clubhouse/dugout then A Rod, that other players can feed off, but I guess only the teammates know for sure.

My ultimate pro award does go to Jeter but he can't put a team on his back and carry them like Pujols or A Rod. Not enough bat and is a very average fielding SS.

Very subjective. I don't know what WilsonC will pull up but Defensive value according to Fangraphs states he is by far the worst defensive everyday shortstop to ever play the game. The gold gloves are quite a joke.

[WilsonC]

Very subjective. I don't know what WilsonC will pull up but Defensive value according to Fangraphs states he is by far the worst defensive everyday shortstop to ever play the game. The gold gloves are quite a joke.

One thing to keep in mind is that accumulating to most negative value at something and being the worst at something are two separate things. Even if we assume the metrics are perfectly accurate, it doesn't follow that he was the worst defensive SS ever, but rather that he wasn't a very good SS but had enough positives going for him in other areas that he accumulated a lot of that negative value. Most shortstops who are mediocre to poor fielders don't have long careers at the position.

But there's something else weird going on with Jeter's defensive numbers. If you look at rWAR's defensive component, Jeter never rates that well, but you can really break his career into three chunks:
- As a young player (through age 24) he's about a -4 per year defender, including a -14 rookie season
- In a five year stretch which should be his prime, he was about a -15 per year fielder from age 25 to 29
- From age 30 and up, he's averaged about a -5

It seems odd to think that he'd be a bit below average when he's still learning, then awful starting from when his offensive game peaked, and then a bit below average again into his 30's. Note also that while his TZ anti-peak is from 1999 to 2003, by UZR he jumps up to around average in 2002 and 2003. Odd.

Or is it? It's a litle funny that his TZ ratings plummeted at exactly the same time as Knoblock started having his throwing problems, continued through the Soriano years, and then improved after Soriano left. Is it coincidence that his worst defensive years coincided with famously bad defensive second base performances? It seems a stretch.

I can't be certain, but my guess is that there's something to do with how DP's are handled that's problematic within the TZ rating if there's a weak link in the DP chain.

Outside of his anti-prime, he seems to rate a bit below average defensively, with some average seasons surrounding the anti-prime (-3 and 2 in 1997 and 1998, 0.9 to -4 in 2002 to 2004) to suggest he might well have been about average in his prime, if my theory about bad second basemen is correct. Certainly not a valid gold glover, but I'm also not sure if he's the historic defensive liability as the raw numbers suggest.

[winningbaseball]

To put things in perspective. No individual carries a team and no one player is solely responsible for what a team achieves or doesn't achieve. No individual players stats determine the success or failure of any team. But there is on outstanding fact that does not go away, Derek Jeter has helped his team to more World Series play and rings than Arod and Pujols combined, in about half the seasons. I'll stick with the best in game, with Jeter. To each their own.
I apologize for bringing Jeter into thread. Arod vs. Pujols. My last word, I select Pujols over Arod. Two rings to one.

[Old Sweater]

Hey, sorry about Jeter also. *sticks behind ear*

As far as A Rod and Pujols goes, I was implying that they could carry a team more with the stick for a short time, not all season. I assume assumption way to much when I state a point.

[Mudge]

To put things in perspective. No individual carries a team and no one player is solely responsible for what a team achieves or doesn't achieve.

Agreed


But there is on outstanding fact that does not go away, Derek Jeter has helped his team to more World Series play and rings than Arod and Pujols combined, in about half the seasons.

So did Posada.


I apologize for bringing Jeter into thread.

Why do I get the feeling you're just kidding? http://serve.mysmiley.net/winking/winking0047.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net)

[Cubs Fan]

Pujols all the way.