Pujols is NL MVP

I correctly predicted the NL MVP.

You're just a bitter old man yelling at a cloud.

 

Newsday's Ken Davidoff explains why he voted Howard sixth in NL MVP voting: http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ny-spken1118,0,1940805.column

If I had a vote, I think I would have voted for Sabathia.

 

And I think the fact that two people voted for Lidge pretty much cements the argument that just because they vote doesn't mean they know what they're talking about.

Anyway, I tire of this argument.

 

Late & Close (defined as PA in the 7th or later with the batting team tied, ahead by one, or the tying run at least on deck):

Pujols: .314 (22-70), 5 2B, 5 HR, 12 RBI, 17 BB, 8 K
Howard: .158 (16-101), 1 2B, 5 HR, 14 RBI, 20 BB, 44 K

There weren't many singling-twice-then-striking-out-in-a-tie-game situations for Pujols. He came through in every situation you want to look at.

Howard is a valid candidate, I'll grant. But his case is very, very weak compared specifically to Pujols, and the only reason someone could possibly vote for him over Pujols is because his TEAMMATES were better, thus affording him more opportunities to drive in runs.

Yes, Howard had to actually drive those runs in -- and I'm not discounting that he did -- but the ONLY reason he had more opportunities (223 PAs with RISP for Howard vs. 176 PAs with RISP for Pujols; nearly 50 more PAs) was because his teammates were better.

And that's his strongest case, the RBI.

I'm sorry, but that's not a good reason to vote for Howard as the MVP.

 

There are some people here whose baseball knowledge I really respect that think Howard wasn't a viable candidate. There are others who deserve every bit as much respect who said they would have voted for him. There are also 12 guys with votes who gave their first-place spot to Howard.

That makes me think the first group is a little off on this one, but I guess some of us will have to agree to disagree on that.

 

I have no problem with Pujols winning. If I had a vote, I'd have voted for Howard. To say it is a no-brainer is totally wrong.

I think a first-place vote for anyone other than Howard or Pujols is wrong.

 

There were also three people who had Rookie of the Year votes who chose Edinson Volquez as their National League Rookie of the Year.

Edinson Volquez has been in the major leagues since 2005 and wasn't eligible for this year's award.

Let's not put too much stock into "12 guys with votes" as a test of credibility, please.

 

Howard:
Men on base: 351 PA, .309, 24 HR 124 RBI, 88K, 45 BB, 6 SF, 11 DP
RISP: 223, .320, 12 HR, 90 RBI, 54 K, 41 BB, 3 DP

Pujols:
Men on base: 317 PA, .354, 17 HR, 96 RBI, 26 K, 69 BB, 8 SF, 16 DP
RISP: 176, .339, 9 HR, 75 RBI, 21 K, 51 BB, 7 DP

 

What's your point?

 

I sure hope it's that Albert Pujols was a much better hitter than Ryan Howard this season.

 

The numbers certainly reflect that. In fact, I'm not sure why spnited posted them, unless his goal was to prove himself wrong.

 

Why?

And how has this conversation not included Willie Hernandez?