I was speaking philosophically. It accounts for the difference in stance, and the rules in Judo that penalize too much defense. You are correct they're basically approaching the same job, but with a slight difference in priority.
I think you're correct about Judo never having much in leg takedowns. I don't recall any from my experience with it 30+ years ago.
Is it possible that the stance thing has to do with the origins of both arts? From what I understand, lower stances reduce mobility compared to upright stances (they might also expose vital points?). Since the techniques of judo come from older styles that were used in armed encounters (on the battlefield and/or in civilian armed encounters) where one had to worry more about the weapon (not to mention multiple opponents) and less about the takedown, it might make sense that it has retained a higher stance. In comparison, wrestling has been used in a lot of cultures as a way to submit humans and cattle, often turning into a sport. Parameters such as weapons and multiple opponents did not influence wrestling as much as they influenced judo. An element that supports that theory is that in other forms of wrestling (and that had similar goals) such as sumo, the stance is lower than in judo.
Thoughts?
I think the worst thing Judo did was to continuously attempt to purge ground grappling and wrestling from the sport instead of allowing the sport to evolve naturally. If you check out the old stories about Judo, one of the main things that leap out to you is how much Kano seems to have an outright distaste towards ground fighting or the idea of Judo turning into a form of western wrestling.
I don't know about the leg locks issue (someone who knows about judo history might want to chime in) but the above quote is not true. Kano actually researched western wrestling and, when he saw something worthwhile, he tried to incorporate it as much as he could (for example, by inviting the best martial artists he could find to teach at the Kodokan or by sending some of his best students to study under famous masters). What's more, he already incorporated ground techniques into his judo when he conceived it but, when his judoka were defeated in shiai by Tanabe Mataemon of Fusen-ryu using ground-fighting, Kano allegedly asked Tanabe to teach ground-fighting at the Kodokan so that judo shifted towards a balance between standing and ground grappling. He also welcomed the desire of some of his students such as Oda Tsunetane or Yaichihyoue Kanemitsu to further develop ground fighting, which led to the invention of things like Kosen judo or the triangle choke (source: Ellis Amdur,
Hidden in Plain Sight, revised edition). Some of the guys at the Kodokan had a strong focus on ground fighting, among which Mistuyo Maeda who later taught the Gracies.
The myth of Kano hating ground-fighting and wanting to "purge" it from judo does not hold up, because
1) he was the one to put it in judo in the first place;
2) he could have removed it anytime if he had wanted to;
3) when he saw that ground-fighting was effective, he added more of it to judo;
4) when his students further developed ground-fighting, he supported them.
One would not be making much of a stretch if one were to say that it was Kano's interest in the ground techniques of Fusen-ryu (and other koryu before them) that popularised them through judo.