Skip to content

Alex Rodriguez dropped 10 pounds this winter

Feb 20, 2011, 1:31 PM EDT

Alex Rodriguez, Andruw Jones

Alex Rodriguez might not be in the proverbial “best shape of his life,” but he did show up to Yankees camp this weekend with a trimmer self.

According to Buster Olney of ESPN.com, the 35-year-old Rodriguez dropped from 233 pounds to 223 pounds this offseason and slid his body fat from 12 percent to nine percent.

Rodriguez has played in at least 116 games in each of the last 15 seasons, but he will turn 36 years old this summer and knows that he needs to stay ahead of the curve fitness-wise to remain an effective third baseman over the course of his massive contract. The DH spot is spoken for this year and should probably be inhabited by Derek Jeter in two years or so.

A-Rod slugged 30 home runs, batted .270/.341/.506 and tallied 125 RBI over 137 games last season.

Watch, Cowboys Stadium popcorn will become a staple for the next great dieting fad.

  1. uyf1950 - Feb 20, 2011 at 1:55 PM

    Good for him. He obviously didn’t go on the Joba diet plan.

    • yankeesfanlen - Feb 20, 2011 at 2:09 PM

      Should be easier than ever to leave ARod alone since there’s less of him.

  2. Brian Murphy - Feb 20, 2011 at 2:42 PM

    That’s interesting because I swear I’ve seen him eat only popcorn during the offseason.

    • bloodysock - Feb 20, 2011 at 3:04 PM

      Pretty sure he’s been eating something else too.

  3. Brian Murphy - Feb 20, 2011 at 4:18 PM

    Boom! HBT: Where latent sexual innuendos happen.

  4. Ari Collins - Feb 20, 2011 at 5:19 PM

    “He needs to stay ahead of the curve fitness-wise to remain an effective third baseman over the course of his massive contract.”

    You can’t remain an effective third baseman if you haven’t been an above-average defender since 2004.

    Still, good news for the Yankees. If he gets healthier, maybe he can remain a below-average third-baseman long enough to move to DH somewhat gracefully.

    • yankeesfanlen - Feb 20, 2011 at 6:20 PM

      Now now. You get a leave ARod alone for that. Tsk, just because you can’t have the best player in baseball, no reason to get testy.

    • uyf1950 - Feb 20, 2011 at 6:25 PM

      Well you could look at it like that. As I’m sure many Red Sox fans might. Or you could look at this way.
      The Yankees have a 7 year contract for $188MM with a player that has averaged 38 HR’s per season over 16 years and 115 RBI’s per year over 16 years, has a lifetime BA of .303, an OBP of .387 and an OPS of ,958. And who over the course of the remaining 7 years will in all likelihood average at least 25 HR’s per and 100 RBI’s per finally eclipsing the all time greats of MLB in career home runs.
      OR
      Done as the Red Sox did sign an ex Rays left fielder to shag balls in left field and steal bases for 7 years for $142MM who has never hit 20 HR’s in a season, never had a 100 RBI season in his career and who at 29 years of age has a lower career BA, OBP and OPS then the 35 year old ARod.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 20, 2011 at 11:32 PM

        Sure, if you pretend defense and baserunning don’t matter. And use a joke stat like RBIs to measure offense, a joke stat that gets even jokier when you consider that Crawford hits 2nd.

        In WAR, which considers slugging, OBP, baserunning, defense, etc., Crawford has beaten A-Rod each of the last two years. And is 6 years younger. And is owed $76M less. (Don’t forget the $30M he’ll get if, as you say, he becomes the all-time HR leader.)

        Nice try at twisting stats, though! A for effort.

      • uyf1950 - Feb 21, 2011 at 7:22 AM

        Ari – my friend. First you need to get your facts straight. ARod gets $6MM as he beats different home run leaders. He doesn’t have to be the all time home run leader. So the Yankees could own him $6MM or any portion of the $30MM total. As for the cost of those milestone incentives built into ARod’s contract the Yankees will make far more money from marketing opportunities then they will ever spend. But I wouldn’t expect you to know or realize that.
        Also, you like to quote your new stats like WAR. The simple reality is ARod has always been and will always be a much better player then Crawford and for more valuable to a team. And for you or anyone else to think or try and say otherwise is foolish and only shows your ignorance and complete bias.
        As for what he is owed you enjoy quoting misleading facts. Your $76MM includes all the milestone incentives for home runs, he isn’t owed that $30MM or any portion of it until he reaches each one. As for your comment about ARod’s defense he has only played the 2 most difficult positions in MLB unlike the newly signed Crawford who’s stellar defense is on exhibit in the outfield in left field and in Fenway probably the easiest position to play in Boston outside of DH. Since all he has to do is chase balls that bounce off the wall. But then again there is that speed that the Red Sox paid $20+MM per season for. He did have 47 stolen bases last year. Let’s see $20MM for 47 stolen bases that’s a little over $425,000 per stolen base the Red Sox are paying for his services. Just think the Yankees paid Gardner $452,000 for the year for his 47 stolen bases, that’s a little over $9,600 per stolen base and he’s 2 years younger than Crawford. Now which team would say say is getting better value for their money? The team that spends $425,000 per stolen base to a player or the one that pays $9,600 to a player to steal bases. Both play left field, both can run and catch and throw, which is all either team is expecting of either player. I wish the Red Sox luck with their $20MM per/$142MM man they are going to need it.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 21, 2011 at 7:57 AM

        WAR adjusts for position. It compares Crawford to the average LF, offensively and defensively, and A-Rod to the average 3B, offensively and defensively. So that’s already factored in.

        I never said he got paid $30M straight up for becoming the home run leader. I said that if you’re expecting him to be the all-time home run leader, and you’re going to compare the amounts Crawford and A-Rod are being paid, then you can’t leave out the extra $30M total A-Rod would have to be paid in your scenario.

        And your argument against WAR being an all-inclusive stat is, “WAR is a new stat and therefore not good!”? A stat that takes into account defense and baserunning and OBP and slugging and position and park factors is worse than your subjective “simple reality” and objective but laughingly incomplete RBIs? At least RBIs is a statistic..

        Fun to lose the argument and change it to Crawford vs. one of the few not overpaid Yankees, though, huh?

      • Ari Collins - Feb 21, 2011 at 8:01 AM

        The argument you started, incidentally, when all I did was mention that A-Rod is not an “effective third-baseman”, something most Yankee fans would agree on. The guy’s battled age and injury since he took over third, and there aren’t too many people who think A-Rod is an average defensive third baseman.

      • uyf1950 - Feb 21, 2011 at 11:02 AM

        Ari -…and there aren’t any fans or experts that I can think of (other then Red Sox fans) that think Crawford is worth $142MM ($20+M per). Like I said quote your WAR stats and whatever else you want the simple truth is Crawford isn’t anywhere near the player ARod was, is or will be. So your WAR comparison is worthless. Period.
        A side not concerning you explanation of WAR and how it takes into consideration players positions. I’m far from an expert but I can tell you with near 100% certainty that ARod would have an easier time covering LF more efficently then Crawford would have covering either SS or 3rd base, even now at their current ages.
        Also, you might want to recheck your facts. ARod started playing 3rd base in 2005. Starting in 2005 through 2010 he played in 162, 154, 158, 138, 124 and 137 games respectively for a total of 873 games. Compared to Crawford during the same period 205 through 2010 he played in 156, 151, 143,107, 156 and 154 games respectively for a total of 867 games. Six games less than ARod. In fact Crawford played less games each of four seasons 2005 through 2008. I would seem to me that Crawford is the one having trouble staying healthy at least that’s what the numbers say over a 6 year period since ARod starting playing 3rd base. But then again you can always fall back on your WAR comparison instead of a players specific numbers.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 21, 2011 at 11:37 AM

        Honestly, I shouldn’t be arguing with someone who thinks that an A-Rod with a balky hip and no range at 3rd can cover the outfield at all.

        That’s one of the most insane arguments I’ve ever heard. And I’ve been on the internet.

      • uyf1950 - Feb 21, 2011 at 12:09 PM

        Ari – So we went from debunking your claim of ARod battling injuries since he starting to play 3rd base to now your claim that he wouldn’t be able or couldn’t cover an outfield position. Once again you misrepresent my comments to fit your own own needs. This is what I said and I quote “…I can tell you with near 100% certainty that ARod would have an easier time covering LF more efficiently then Crawford would have covering either SS or 3rd base, even now at their current ages.” The point of my comment was ARod could cover an outfield spot more efficiently than Crawford could cover SS or 3rd base. Since you didn’t address that comment I can only presume that you agree with it.
        Actually my friend one of the most insane arguments made is your contention that Crawford is worth 7 years and $142MM to shag balls off the Green Monster and steal bases. How many bases do you think he is going to steal when he’s 35 and 36 in the last 2 years of that contract. But there is some consolation for Sox fans. He still will be able to shag balls off the Green Monster.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 21, 2011 at 1:22 PM

        Sigh. Why do I do this?

        1. A-Rod playing lots of games doesn’t mean he was healthy. You can be healthy enough to play without being healthy enough to field well. This happens all the time, and TONS of scouting reports from the last couple years have pointed to A-Rod’s range being in serious decline due to his hip. Honestly, this has been all over the news.

        2. It’s insane to say that A-Rod can play the outfield at all. No, I didn’t argue with your entire point that A-Rod could play a better OF than Crawford could play 3B. Because it’s insane, starting with the fact that A-Rod couldn’t play OF at all. Guy’s got very little range at this point.

        3. I never said that Crawford was worth $142M over seven. You brought up Crawford and said he was overpaid, and compared him to A-Rod’s contract. I pointed out that A-Rod is six years older, has not been as good the last couple years, and is owed $75M more than Crawford if he follows your scenario and keeps his one skill of hitting home runs. None of that means Crawford isn’t overpaid, just that A-Rod is owed more for less. None of this is difficult logic or difficult to read.

        I bring up actual attempts to value players’ overall games, while you try to pretend that only home runs and RBIs matter, baserunning doesn’t, poor defense at 3B is better than gold glove defense in LF, and other ridiculous claims with nothing to back them up. That’s fine, because it’s my fault for trying to argue with someone who has no interest in any facts that are inconvenient for his favorite team.

        But at least get my arguments right.

      • uyf1950 - Feb 21, 2011 at 3:41 PM

        Ari – Let me answer your very first question. About why you do this. The answer seems clear to me. You feel the need to justify an untenable position. I would love to get your arguments right, but they keep changing.
        For example earlier you posted and I quote “..The guy’s battled age and injury since he took over third..”. When I gave you the stats that clearly indicated he had been playing 3rd base since 2005 and had not missed any appreciable time for the next 4 years. You changed your arguments to say and I quote “…A-Rod playing lots of games doesn’t mean he was healthy. You can be healthy enough to play without being healthy enough to field well” end of quote. I guess based on that rational we should presume the reverse in Crawford case. He missed a lot of games so he just didn’t want to play that’s why he missed the games. How is anyone to get your arguments right when they keep changing to suit your position. But my comments on Crawford above are just my opinion. Just like yours are just your opinion about ARod and his ability to play games without being healthy enough to field well.
        Tell me how much range does a player need to play left field at Fenway in front of the Green Monster? When you consider Jason Bay played the position in 2009, Manny being Manny played there several years including 2008 and before him Troy O’Leary and let’s not forget the rag tag group of Nava and Hermida that played the position in 2010. I’m guessing “range” and “defense” or all around ability is not a key factor in playing left field at Fenway in front of the Green Monster. So please don’t tell me that ARod with whatever defensive deficiencies real or perceived you want to attribute to him couldn’t play left field at Fenway today. Because that would be laughable.
        I’m done discussing this topic, because it’s impossible to hit the moving target your ever changing arguments present.
        One final comment. I wish you and all the rest of the Red Sox fans luck in 2011 because based on your (referring to the Red Sox Nation as a whole) expectation of a World Series appearance and eventual World Series win anything short of that will bring utter chaos and finger pointing to 4 Yawkey Way, Boston, MA.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 21, 2011 at 6:55 PM

        I don’t even understand. Are you purposefully misinterpreting now? How is saying that A-Rod’s injury has hampered his range at all controversial? Anyone who follows his injury or has looked at defensive stats or listened to scouts or has just watched him try to field agrees.

        I can’t believe you think it’s merely an opinion that players can have their performance suffer without needing DL time. It’s called “playing through an injury.” Every player is banged up to a certain degree, and quite often players play through the injury because to have sit out (or have surgery) would mean missing significant time and hurting the team. 80% of A-Rod’s production (hell, 50%!) is better than A-Rod missing time and having to put Eduardo Nunez out there as your everyday 3B.

        Honestly, did you miss every news story about A-Rod playing hurt last year?

    • Ari Collins - Feb 20, 2011 at 10:31 PM

      Haha, baiting Yankee fans is fun. I was just talking about his defense, which is poor but not godawful.

  5. dickclydesdale - Feb 20, 2011 at 5:24 PM

    No more steroids=skinny ball players. A-Roid was a good 260 lbs when he was on steroids & now is 220…

  6. cur68 - Feb 20, 2011 at 10:50 PM

    Roger Bernadina can now break him in half.

  7. sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Feb 21, 2011 at 1:01 AM

    “You can’t remain an effective third baseman if you haven’t been an above-average defender since 2004. ” ~Ari

    Since you obviously dig fangraphs, remind me again which Red Sox player has been worth 41.5 WAR since 2004 again. Thank you. Why did you pick that particular time frame? Right!

    • Ari Collins - Feb 21, 2011 at 8:59 AM

      Yep, A-Rod’s been an excellent overall player in that timeframe! I was just talking about his defense, which is (I think) all Drew’s line was about.

      That puts his ’04-’07 offense in perspective, though, doesn’t it? Even with being a merely good player the last couple years, and even with being a poor defender every year, he’s still been a 6-7 win player in his time with the Yankees. Sheesh.

  8. Jonny 5 - Feb 21, 2011 at 8:50 AM

    I can’t wait for Cashman to make a statement on this. I predict it’ll be something to this effect. ” He looks like he’s lost 3 Lbs tops, and he looks very tired all the time, I think he may be hiding some kind of illness.”

    Or something like that….

    • Panda Claus - Feb 21, 2011 at 11:35 AM

      Or that he still wears among the largest hats of any Yankees player ever (just further conjecture on what Cashman might say).

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Angels' 2011 overhaul finally paying off?
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. R. Castillo (3245)
  2. G. Stanton (2546)
  3. A. Rizzo (2317)
  4. H. Ryu (2085)
  5. J. Hamilton (2018)
  1. N. Arenado (1985)
  2. M. Trout (1977)
  3. E. Gattis (1911)
  4. D. Ortiz (1817)
  5. A. Pujols (1774)