C
Chi City 81
Guest
Ryan Howard just won the NL MVP, according to ESPN.
No link available yet.
No link available yet.
Columbo said:If what Pujols did in the last week isn't the very essence of Most Valuable, they should rename the award right now.
I mean, honestly, make up your mind.
First, you bozos blather on about how it isn't "player of the year"... and then you guys pull out Player of the Year rationale for Howard.
Howard sucked the tailpipe like he was Paris Hilton for the final three weeks of the season.
Even that asshat Oz, who used that struggled-down-the-stretch rationale to disqualify Dan Uggla (actually, Oz picked out seven games, one-third the number that Howard blew chunks in... hilarious little ****er) from rookie of the year (which as he pointed out when he was trying to work the other side of the fence in ripping Uggla, does not carry MVP-type requirements), is going two-face and not applying the standard on Howard.... only because his simple guacamole-filled orb on his neck can't ever allow him to agree with me.
Little lemming.
Columbo said:mustardbased said:Columbo said:Let's get this straight:
a. You just dissed a guy for hitting ,384.
b. You consider "one MVP moment" worse than ZERO MVP moments.
I'll give jag credit, though. He at least is trying to support his argument.
You poor little manure-munching misanthropic munchkin, I have you killed with the facts.
You just can't admit it.
Columbo said:Howard makes Carlos Delgado look like Keith Hernandez at first, but I know, that doesn't count either.
Doesn't work into the equation.
And the disregard of hitting .421 with 5 HRs the final 20 games, and hitting THE HR that advances your team to the postseason.
Incredible hypocrisy, just so you can disagree with me.
Columbo said:mustardbased said:Two things everyone in this thread (with the exception of dumbass) seem to agree on:
1) It's an incredibly close race and a compelling argument can be made for both players.
It may be close, but it isn't close enough to successfully argue Howard.
casty33 said:Hosed? Jobbed? Please, let's be fair. Pujols is a great player and he again had a wonderful year for a team that won its division. BUT ... Howard also had a great year for a team that contended -- which is all that should be necessary to be a legitimate MVP candidate -- and a team that finished with more wins than the Cardinals.
Where are the negatives on Howard? I say that fully admitting that either of them could have won and it would have been justified, in my mind.
casty33 said:Hosed? Jobbed? Please, let's be fair.
casty33 said:Where are the negatives on Howard? I say that fully admitting that either of them could have won and it would have been justified, in my mind.
casty33 said:Hosed? Jobbed? Please, let's be fair. Pujols is a great player and he again had a wonderful year for a team that won its division. BUT ... Howard also had a great year for a team that contended -- which is all that should be necessary to be a legitimate MVP candidate -- and a team that finished with more wins than the Cardinals.
Where are the negatives on Howard? I say that fully admitting that either of them could have won and it would have been justified, in my mind.
Columbo said:casty33 said:Where are the negatives on Howard? I say that fully admitting that either of them could have won and it would have been justified, in my mind.
Do these baseball writers ever watch anyone play defense, run bases.... all the stuff jag mentioned?
Columbo said:casty33 said:Where are the negatives on Howard? I say that fully admitting that either of them could have won and it would have been justified, in my mind.
Do these baseball writers ever watch anyone play defense, run bases.... all the stuff jag mentioned?