Hanley Ramirez has been bad. Hanley Ramirez has been disgracefully, embarrassingly, pathetically bad, to the point that almost nothing can quantify just how bad he's been. In Michael Jordan's one and only season with the Birmingham Barons, he batted .202. We're almost at Independence Day, and Hanley Ramirez has a despicable .200 average. Yes, he has been worse than Michael Jordan... the baseball player this year. (The sound you're hearing is me banging my head against the table for drafting him.)
So asking if you'd rather have Albert Pujols instead of Hanley Ramirez wouldn't exactly have been a fair question. Ramirez has been trash and Pujols, after a sluggish April, was at last turning the corner and justifying his stature as the best player in the game. But... things certainly changed on Sunday, didn't they? Pujols broke his wrist and will now be out for 4-6 weeks, with no guarantee that he'll regain 100% of his superhuman power. And he was already having a bad year, by his standards.
So, here's a question to ponder. If you could choose only one, who would you rather own for the rest of the year: an erratic, extremely disappointing Hanley Ramirez, who was widely considered the second-best player in the game as recently as this year, or, Albert Pujols in an off year, knowing that you'll have to wait until at least August just to play him and that he might not be the same player?