SaberMets.com

I've got to say Bonds is better than A-Rod, for the simple fact that the guy changes an entire baseball game. It's almost like he knows what's coming. A-Rod is a good player, but he doesn't dictate a game likes Bonds does.

After that, I'd go with Pujols. Then A-Rod.

I mean, it's scary to think that Pujols might not even be at his peak yet.

Despite lagging behind some players in a few offensive categories, I think A-Rod's title as the best player in baseball is not wholey without merit. The guy's got the complete package - Gold Glove caliber defense and one of only a few current players who are a threat to hit for the triple crown. And the fact that he's done all that he's done before reaching his 29th birthday doesn't hurt either. However, if you gave me a choice between who is simply the better hitter and who has more of a potential upside in the batters box from this season forward, I think you have to go with Pujols (assuming his stated age is correct).

The list boils down to Bonds, Sosa, Pujols, and Rodriguez in my mind. (Manny, Giambi and Thome are basically DH/1B types and Helton and Walker are out for Coors reasons).

While "best" doesn't neccessarily mean "complete" that is something that should be included. A-Rod's glove and speed is something he brings to the table that no one else on the list does. Pujols has versatility, playing four positions. But odds are he's not a Gold Glover anywhere. Bonds has gold gloves, but those days are behind him.

I do think park factors for Bonds is misleading. The park factor takes the WHOLE park into consideration, and Barry ain't using the whole park. Pac Bell was built for Barry's left-handed pull stroke and it's 307 down the line to right field.

Other stadium stats are misleading for Barry. ESPN this summer claimed that Pac Bell was the "hardest park to hit HRs to RF in" because it had the fewest total HRs hit to RF. And Barry has over half those HRs, so it must be very hard and Barry's very good.
But apply common sense to the stats. First, the fewest HRs hit to RF doesn't mean it's the HARDEST. the park with the lowest number of homeruns to RF per plate appearance by a lefty should get that distinction. Most homers to RF are hit by lefties. Barry plays 81 games there, the only other lefty to play more than 10 games there in a season is JT Snow. Barry SHOULD have more than half the HRs hit to RF. He should be up 8-1 on anyone not named JT Snow. In his career, Helton averages 16 HRs per 81 games played at Pac Bell. Last year, Barry had 16. Take the Giants above-average staff into consideration and that's about right.
The bigger question is why haven't the Giants added more lefty power hitters? (Well, the real big question is why do teams allow Barry to be so comfortable on top of the plate).

Eric,
Finally, a voice of reason. I've been thinking the very same thoughts over the past week. In fact, I e-mailed Aaron Gleeman and asked him to please set the record straight with regard to "best player in the game". He took me up on the challenge and it appears in today's blog. Look at it this way. Bonds average OPS over the past 3 years is 1,346 and ARod's is 1,011. That's a difference of .335. In the same span, ARod's OPS is .323 higher than Rey Ordonez's. So the gap between Bonds and ARod is greater than the gap between ARod and the anemic Rey-Rey. WOW! Even considering the idea that ARod is better than Bonds is silly. THEY ARE NOT COMPARABLE PLAYERS! If they were, than the factor of defensive position would be relevant. But they're not. ARod is a great player, as are many others. Bonds is a statistical anomaly, a player with no current peer. Like you, I refer to him as "God". And I don't really even like him. The most amazing thing about the past few weeks is that almost every commentator simply says that ARod is the best player in the game. Are they that uninformed? I guess so. And as for the silly argument that ARod is younger and somehow that makes him better, than what about Pujols? Quite simply, unless your name is Ruth you cannot be better than Bonds. Does everyone understand what a .542 OBP means? ARod's over the past 3 years is .396. Slugging percentage for Bonds is .804. ARod's is .615. According to baseball-reference.com the most comparable player historically to ARod is Piazza. For Bonds it is that Ruth fellow.
Thanks for the sanity,
Steve

Steve builds a powerful case, but still. It kind of depends on the purpose for asking the question. If someone offered you the rest of A-Rod's career or the rest of Bonds's career, I hope it wouldn't take you too long to choose the former. Going forward, A-Rod has more total value to a franchise than Bonds. He has more trade value, doesn't he? If you're asking me who is "better" in terms of how they've produced in the last 1, 2, 3, X years (pick your number -- it doesn't matter how many years it is, the answer remains the same), the answer is Bonds. Easily. If you're asking me who is likely to be better in 2004, the answer remains Bonds.

But if you offered me either player for the rest of his career, I'd take A-Rod.

Good point Sam, it's an important distinction to make. In all likelihood, A-Rod will play another 10+ years, while compiling some 300 additional Win Shares, while Bonds has three years left on his current deal, and might see another 100 Win Shares.

Of course, Pujols could play another 15 years and put up 400-something Win Shares.

There is no question that A-Rod will have the more productive career moving forward, just as there's no question who has been the better player over the past few seasons (or more).