There are currently lots of exciting, stellar shortstops in MLB at the moment: Trea Turner, Corey Seager, Xander Bogaerts, Tim Anderson, Trevor Story, Bo Bichette, and of course Fernando Tatis Jr.
Francisco Lindor and Carlos Correa, however, are better than most of them, except for maybe Tatis and Turner.
They are both excellent all-around players in one of the game’s most difficult positions.
But we can’t help but wonder who is the better of the two.
Both were born in Puerto Rico and are separated by months, not years; and both have excelled for a while now.
The Case For Correa
If we are comparing Correa and Lindor strictly from an offensive standpoint, then the former gets the nod.
The former Houston Astros shortstop has a career .277/.356/.481 line, compared to .278/.343/.478 for Lindor.
The two are awfully close, but the ability to get on base is what makes Correa a better hitter and offensive player.
If we adjust their offensive performance to ballpark, leagues, and other factors using wRC+ (weighted Runs Created Plus), we see that Correa’s 128 mark is higher than Lindor’s 117.
More traditional stats also give the edge to Correa, like OPS (.837 to .821)
Correa is, additionally, a very solid fielder who is coming off winning a Gold Glove in 2021.
He is also a postseason hero in Houston.
At the moment, he is a free agent, and is reportedly looking for a contract similar to the one Lindor signed this year with the New York Mets: a 10-year, $341 million pact.
This says Correa wants nothing less than Lindor money. I love Carlos Correa, but you cannot even think about paying him that. Nobody should, but somebody probably will. https://t.co/W87RY0uFsV
— Michael Connor (@MC790) November 17, 2021
Market circumstances may prevent him from getting there when all is said and done, but with several teams needing a shortstop, he is going to get paid.
The Case For Lindor
Lindor is a comparable hitter to Correa, as we have already seen, and may be a slightly better fielder and runner.
Whereas some defensive metrics, like UZR/150 (-2.8 over his career) don’t like Correa, most of the traditional ones love Lindor (10.1 UZR/150, 47 DRS).
Correa has 67 DRS, though.
Lindor has way more stolen bases, 109, to Correa’s 33.
Lindor also has an advantage in Wins Above Replacement, or WAR.
Both have played since 2015, and Lindor’s 32.1 WAR trumps Correa’s 25.1.
Yes, Lindor has played 902 games to Correa’s 752, but that is the result of another thing that should be taken as a skill in the comparison: health.
In August, the Mets shortstop suffered a rare oblique injury, but he has managed to stay healthy for the most part during his playing career.
The same cannot be said about Correa, who has missed large chunks of the 2017, 2018, and 2019 campaigns.
The Verdict
It’s tough to determine who is the better shortstop between the two, because they are both well-rounded performers with few flaws.
Correa has a better offensive profile and has unforgettable postseason moments.
He already has 18 playoff home runs and is just 27 years old.
Lindor, however, swings a similarly good stick, has been stellar for longer, and is more consistent, 2021 struggles aside.
They are both good offensive players, fast, young, and excellent with the glove.
Lindor’s four All-Star berths (compared to two for Correa) and two Silver Sluggers should also be considered in the analysis.
In the end, Lindor is a better bet to stay healthy for the long haul, so he gets the nod.
Correa has insane production in the playoffs. The health is the big issue, but it's not like defensively he's much worse than Lindor. I LOVE Lindor obv LGM but, Correa's really good on D.
— Ari Alexander (@AriA1exander) April 1, 2021
The difference between the two is negligible, though, and Correa has a solid argument, too.
NEXT: Mickey Mantle Vs. Willie Mays (Who Was Better?)