Originally posted by whodey
Actually, I was only thinking during the time that Prince Albert played.
However, now that you mention it, lets compare him to the crew you mentioned.
Pujols has a distinct disadvantage to the group you listed, simply because he has not been around as long to amass stats. As a result, I think that averages may be a better indicator. For example, the o ...[text shortened]...
As Obionecanobi once said of Vader, "The man is more of a machine than human". 😛
Let's examine your stats a little more closely.
First of all, baseballs have flown out of stadiums at a more prolific rate overall during
the last 15 years. This was due, in part, by MLB trying to lure fans back to the game.
The ball is juiced, just as are many players. The equipment is better. Travel is better.
You would expect that the stats would improve accordingly.
That being said, I would temper the numbers of the current players when comparing them to earlier generations.
If you want to do a true testament to the quality, why not perform a comparison between
Pujols and the rest of his contemporaries, and then do the same with the players I listed.
I believe this will narrow the skew for you sufficiently.
Secondarily, if you are going to call someone the greatest player of all time, how
can you dismiss 50% of the game (i.e. playing defense)? You cannot.
How many runs did the players I mention save their respective teams due to their
Wouldn't you agree that saving a run is equal to generating a run in the course of a game?
I certainly would say that it is.
Pujols is a great player, no doubt. He will be in the HOF in the future, no doubt.
He may be the best player of "his" era. But I do not think he is close to the best player ever.