You know what I really hate? When every single sportswriter complains that the Angels paid too much money for Albert Pujols, or that he's not one of the best players in baseball anymore, or that he's not been anywhere near impressive lately. And they blather onnnn and onnnn about lost potential and blah blah blah. It drives me up the wall.
Albert Pujols had a home-run hitting renaissance last season, going toe-to-toe with Mike Trout in terms of best-hitter-on-the-team status, and proving he can still be a legitimate force at the plate. And yet they still pry on and on.
Albert Pujols has over 500 home runs, and is probably going to pass 600 before he retires. He's practically notched his ticket to Cooperstown years ago. Just because Albert's numbers have declined a bit because he's getting up in his thirties doesn't mean he's incapable of playing baseball. He's not Superman, even though he came close to being Superman during the 2000's. It's like the people who criticized Ken Griffey in Cincinnati. Yes, he's not the same, but age happens and injuries happen. You're not always gonna get a perfect roll of the dice, so no use in blaming the team for overpaying. That gets you nowhere.
Albert's probably gonna have a solid year this year, and he's already hit a couple nice homers. Obviously the focus will be on Mike Trout, but that's not to say Albert won't have some nice games as well. He's just not going to be the focal point of the lineup. But, as you'll recall, when the Angels signed Pujols in 2012, they partly expected him to be the focal point of the lineup, but some of them saw what was happening with Mike Trout. That he'd probably take over and come up in a big way.
Expecting some good stuff from Albert, even if they don't match up to his 2000's numbers.
Amen to that.
ReplyDelete