Later this week, Albert Pujols should finally be winning his second MVP award, despite being arguably baseball's best player for his entire eight-year career. Awards seem to elude Albert, as he's also only taken home one Gold Glove despite being viewed by the stat-heads as easily the best defensive first baseman in the NL. So I guess it wouldn't altogether shock me if the voters incorrectly talked themselves into CC Sabathia, Manny Ramirez, or Ryan Howard. If you hear it from Pujols, though, he shouldn't win the award over those three ... by virtue of team accomplishments. "I see it this way: Someone who doesn't take his team to the playoffs doesn't deserve to win the MVP."Yep, Pujols said that ... in 2006. He wanted to win the MVP over Howard that year, as the Cards made the postseason and the Phils did not. The proverbial shoe is on the other foot, as the Cardinals finished fourth in the NL Central and the three candidates I mentioned above competed in the postseason. I'm wondering how Mr. Pujols feels about it now?
I think he should win, but does he?
Comments (Page 1 of 2)
It was closer in 2006, but Pujols deserved the MVP then, just like he does now (and it's not even close this year). Also, though it was closer, Pujols was still robbed in 2006 (and it would be orders of magnitude worse this year).
Anyone that votes for Ryan Howard for NL MVP should have his MVP voting rights revoked. Period. Howard is, at best, the third-best 1B in the NL behind Pujols and Berkman. He is not the MVP.
The games in April still count - and Howard was Mario freaking Mendoza in those games.
hey g...even though Howard had a bad April he still hit the most HRs and the most RBI's. He carried the team offensively, right into the championship. He is the MVP. Albert Who?
Yes, he hit the most HRs. He was still 6th on own his team in OBP and trailed 5 NLers in SLG, including two other 1Bs. RBI is a useless stat, for the reasons I've explained.
As for carrying the team offensively, let's look at September and the postseason, shall we? The Phillies were 17-8 in September. In only 5 of those games, if you subtracted Howard's RBI, the Phillies would have tied or lost. If you count only those games where subtracting Howard's RBI equals a loss, that's 1 game. One game where Ryan Howard's RBIs were what carried the Phillies out of 17 wins. By the way, counting RBIs like this includes those HRs. As for the postseason, let's see. Howard hit .269/.397/.500 in the whole postseason, with 3 HR and 9 RBI. Decent numbers. But subtract his RBIs, and do you know how many games the Phillies tie or lose? One. If it's subtract his RBIs and lose, the number is zero. That's right. By the numbers you've chosen - HR/RBI - the Phillies probably would have won the division and the World Series without Howard's RBIs.
Which brings me to the larger point that it's virtually impossible for one player to "carry" a team like you've described and in any case, Howard did not do so for the last month of the season or any of the postseason. He's not the MVP. Pujols is. The only reason Pujols was sitting at home in October? Romero, Madson and Lidge v. Springer, Franklin and McClellan.
For you to ask "Albert Who?" is like asking "Mike Schmidt Who?" only much, much worse.
Yes,. Pujols is an amazing hitter. He hits for average and for a power hitter strikes out so few times it rediculous -- he's a throw back to DiMaggio. However, Howard has the power numbers, including 199 whiffs that killed his average. He carried his team into the playoffs when it counted in Sept. His numbers would have been much higher and his strike outs fewer if he wasn't hurt in the spring. He should be the MVP. Sorry Albert. Just think of the numbers he would toss up if he is healthy, and cuts down on his strike outs by about 50. It wouldn't hurt if he had a consistent hitter batting behind him, either. BTW, he has hit more homers in his 3 years in the bigs than any other player in the history of the game.
Manny and CC only played part of the season in the NL so even though I think Manny was the MVP for his team and best player in the NL when he was there, I like Ryan Howard but he is mostly a home run machine and that's about it so if you like the long ball and voted for someone who took their eam to the World Series, I guess he gets your vote. From what I have seen of Pujols when he speaks, I bet he can find an excuse to justify his winning now while at the same time, bashing Howard again. This one could be interesting and go in any of those directions and if I had a vote, it would be Manny myself but I can't blame you Snyder for voting for Pujols, the man is an awesome player and at his best when he shuts his mouth and plays.
Team records have never seemed to matter to MVP voters. I wish they did. I'd like to retroactively take back a few of ARod's.
I was wondering when someone, anyone, was going to bring up Pujols' comments from '06. If you'll remember, in 2006 Ryan Howard, while still striking out a lot (181 times), hit .313 to go with his 58 homers and 149 RBI. And quite simply, while he does strike out wayyyy too much, at the end of the day he's hitting 50 home runs and knocking in 150 every year. Pujols' point from two years ago is the classic "Most Valuable vs. Most Outstanding" argument; no matter how great the numbers are, without taking the team to the playoffs, can he be most "valuable" by definition?
If I were voting, Pujols would be my choice. But I can't knock people who choose to see it the other way.
Howard's hit 50 HRs once, in 2006. He's never gotten to 150 RBIs. And while the HRs are wholly within his control, the RBIs are not. Howard got that many because his team is better at getting on base.
That same year Howard hit .313, Pujols hit .331. In 2006, with RISP, Howard went .256/.418/.518 in 146 at bats. Pujols went .397/.535/.802 in 126 at bats. Howard got 306 ABs with no one on, 275 with runners on. Pujols got 299/236. That's why Howard had 12 more RBIs, or one more every 13.5 games.
I disagreed with Pujols then on that point, and I do now. It's not Pujols's fault the Cards had a bad bullpen and kept blowing saves this year. If the Cards' bullpen had been league average, the Cards (and not the Brewers) make the playoffs in 2008. Then Pujols gets the MVP?
It's also not to Howard's credit that the lineup surrounding him is better at getting on base than Pujols's. The only thing Howard seems to do better than Pujols is hit HRs. But Pujols is better in everything else (including SLG, both in 2006 and 2008, while hitting fewer HRs) even without getting to defense.
One must look at the criteria by which the MVP is "supposed" to be judged. If you think the people who get the vote base their decision on that criteria then Albert Pujols certainly deserves to be the National League MVP.
However, with so many uniquely qualified players in both the NL and Al, it is extremely difficult to simply select one from each league.
Please remember the MVP award was initiated when there were only 8 teams in each league - a LONG TIME ago. Perhaps the criteria for the award needs to undergo some revision.
One last anecdotal point. In game one of the World Series, the Rays intentionally walked Chase Utley to pitch to Ryan Howard. Let me repeat that - with one out, the Rays chose to put men on first and second to pitch to Ryan Howard instead of pitching to Chase Utley with a man on second and one out.
You think anyone ever walks the guy in front of Pujols (or Berkman) to pitch to Pujols (or Berkman)? Ryan Howard is not the 2008 NL MVP.
Howard's hit 50 HRs once, in 2006. He's never gotten to 150 RBIs.
Ok. 2006, 58 & 149. 2007, 47 & 136. 2008, 48 & 146. If you want to nitpick go ahead, but that's an average of 51 HR and 144 RBI over his first three seasons. On that basis alone, he's going to be an MVP candidate every year.
Again, I'd vote for Pujols this year, too, but to act like Howard is some schlub is ridiculous. He's putting up numbers to start his career that no one ever has.
And to your point about the World Series game, obviously Howard was not hitting well at that point. But when your choice is to pitch to Utley or Howard, not to mention put a double play in order with a slow runner, it's not that ridiculous. You don't discount Pujols' worthiness because his team isn't as good, but you can't discount Howard because he happens to have one of the best hitters in baseball in front of him. Exactly what kind of impact was Pujols having from his couch? That's basically the point Pujols was making two years ago.
Howard's hit 50 HRs once, in 2006. He's never gotten to 150 RBIs.
Ok. 2006, 58 & 149. 2007, 47 & 136. 2008, 48 & 146. If you want to nitpick go ahead, but that's an average of 51 HR and 144 RBI over his first three seasons. On that basis alone, he's going to be an MVP candidate every year.
Again, I'd vote for Pujols this year, too, but to act like Howard is some schlub is ridiculous. He's putting up numbers to start his career that no one ever has.
And to your point about the World Series game, obviously Howard was not hitting well at that point. But when your choice is to pitch to Utley or Howard, not to mention put a double play in order with a slow runner, it's not that ridiculous. You don't discount Pujols' worthiness because his team isn't as good, but you can't discount Howard because he happens to have one of the best hitters in baseball in front of him. Exactly what kind of impact was Pujols having from his couch? That's basically the point Pujols was making two years ago.
Never said Howard was a schlub, and didn't mean to. Howard might be one of the best hitters of his generation. Pujols (who is a year younger than Howard), on the other hand, might be one of the best hitters in the history of the game. Look at their comparables at Baseball Reference. Howard's are nice. Every one of Pujols's is an all-time great.
By the way, is the MVP award for the regular season, or is it supposed to include postseason performance? If it's the latter, the award definitely goes to Pujols. Howard didn't do much of anything this postseason. Of course, we both know it's the former. Which is why I disagreed with Pujols's point then and now.
Sure you people can dish Ryan Howard all you want..Where was Pujols at??? Ya thats right sitting home, while the Phillies won the World Series..So G what ever you are smoking go back and do some more..lets make in three years in a row that the mvp award comes to Philly...
The bottom line in all of this is who is this an award for the best player or the player who made his team the best. When everyone agrees on that then it will make it easy to make the choice. As I look at it Albert had the better year of but Ryan helped out incarrying his team and they won a world series while ALbert had a great year but was home watching the Phillies win the World Series
It should be Brad Lidge MVP with Howard a close 2nd, how can u give to a player who's team finishes 4th in division
Because the award is not given on the basis of where a player's team finishes in the standings. It's not on the list of criteria the BBWWA uses.
And asking that question just strengthens the case against Howard. If the best thing that can be said about Howard is that he played on a better team, then he is not the most valuable player. Howard did not "carry" the Phillies through September, and certainly did not "carry" them through the postseason. He was the third-best 1B, overall, in the NL, a fearsome hitter, but not the MVP. That's Albert Pujols.
You might as well rename the MVP award to the Philly award!....Howard AGAIN!....Like it
right on G!...i can tell all these chicks here dig the long ball
lets just phrase it as the best player a.k.a mvp of the league that particular year with playoffs meaning nothing best statistical records all around hits average homers rbi walks strikeouts ect ect ect albert pujlos hands down