Dilip Vishwanat/Getty Images
John Kruk believes that they both are, pointing to the fact that they are both former MVP award winners who are regarded as two of the best players in the game.
Neither one can be classified only as a "slugger"; rather these are both complete players who can change a game with a swing of the bat or a play with their glove. He believes that only Miguel Cabrera may be as complete a hitter as Hamilton and Pujols.
Personally, I think Robinson Cano should be included in that discussion as well.
Schilling thinks that outside of Boston and New York, Pujols does receive the attention that he deserves. If Pujols played in New York, he would be looked at the same way that fans look at Derek Jeter.
Hamilton, on the other hand, Schilling does not believe is as well known as he should be and that there really isn't much that he can do to change it.
He thinks that if Hamilton played in a larger market that he would be looked at the same way people look at Kobe Bryant or Tom Brady.
While I agree that Hamilton would be more well known if he played in a bigger market, I'm not sure if he would ever be able to reach Kobe/Brady levels of exposure and brand recognition.
Playing in Texas, the Dallas Cowboys always have been and will be the focus of the state. It would take a PR and marketing machine that focused on nothing but Josh Hamilton to overtake the exposure that the Cowboys have, and even then there is no guarantee that they would be successful in doing so.
As Schilling said: "If you asked 10 people to name two players on the Rangers and two players on the Cowboys, more would be able to name two Cowboys."
Hamilton may never be able to reach his full marketing potential playing in Texas, and part of me thinks that it's probably better for Hamilton to fly under the radar then to constantly be in the spotlight.