Ryan Howard = MVP

[stevew]

NEW YORK -- Ryan Howard of the Philadelphia Phillies was voted the National League's Most Valuable Player on Monday after leading the majors in home runs and RBI, beating out the St. Louis Cardinals' Albert Pujols for the honor.

Howard's End
Ryan Howard had a magical season for the Phillies and was rewarded Monday with his first NL MVP Award. Howard is the fourth Phillies player to win the award and first since Mike Schmidt in 1986. • Fun fact: He's the third player to win the MVP award and Home Run Derby in the same season. Cal Ripken Jr. (1991) and Andre Dawson (1987) are the others.
Phillies MVPs, All-time
Ryan Howard	2006
Mike Schmidt	1980, '81, '86
Jim Konstanty	1950
Chuck Klein	1932

Howard received 20 first-place votes and 12 seconds for 388 points in balloting by a panel of the Baseball Writers' Association of America. Pujols got 12 firsts, 19 seconds and one third for 347 points.
Howard, the 2005 NL Rookie of the Year, had 58 homers and 149 RBI while batting .313. He had the most homers in the major leagues since Barry Bonds hit a record 73 in 2001.
He set Phillies records for home runs and RBI, producing the highest totals in those categories in big league history for a second-year player. Twenty-three of Howard's homers put the Phillies ahead and five tied games. The Phillies went 32-18 in games in which he homered.
Pujols, who hit .331 with 49 homers and 137 RBI, defeated Atlanta's Andruw Jones 378-351 in last year's voting after finishing second in 2002 and 2003. Stan Musial and Ted Williams (four times each) are the only players to finish second more often than Pujols, who matched three-time AL MVP Mickey Mantle with three second-place finishes.

2006 NL MVP Voting
Player	1st	2nd	3rd	Pts
Ryan Howard, Phillies	20	12	--	388
Albert Pujols, Cardinals	12	19	1	347
Lance Berkman, Astros	--	--	21	230
Carlos Beltran, Mets	--	1	5	211
Miguel Cabrera, Marlins	--	--	2	170
Alfonso Soriano, Nats	--	--	1	106
Jose Reyes, Mets	--	--	1	98
Chase Utley, Phillies	--	--	--	98
David Wright, Mets	--	--	1	70
Trevor Hoffman, Padres	--	--	--	46
Scoring: 14 points for first place, nine for second, eight for third and on down to one for 10th. Others receiving votes: Andruw Jones (29), Carlos Delgado (23), Nomar Garciaparra (18), Rafael Furcal (11), Garrett Atkins (10), Matt Holliday (10), Aramis Ramirez (5), Freddy Sanchez (5), Chris Carpenter (4), Chipper Jones (3), Mike Cameron (2), Jimmy Rollins (2), Bronson Arroyo (1), Jason Bay (1).

Pujols was third in the NL in batting average behind Pittsburgh's Freddy Sanchez and Florida's Miguel Cabrera, and second to Howard in homers and RBI.
Stan Musial (four times), Ted Williams (four times) are the only players to finish second more often than Pujols, who matched three-time AL MVP Mickey Mantle with three second-place finishes.
Houston's Lance Berkman was third with 230 points, followed by the New York Mets' Carlos Beltran (211), Cabrera (170) and Washington's Alfonso Soriano (106) -- who on Sunday reportedly reached a preliminary agreement on an eight-year contract with the Chicago Cubs worth about $136 million.
Pujols gets a $100,000 bonus for finishing second, Berkman $250,000 for placing third and Beltran $200,000 for winding up fourth.
Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press

[JPhillips]

Why do they vote all the way down to tenth? Isn't a top five good enough?

[MizzouRah]

They still need a separate award for best player and MVP. Pujols should be the MVP and Howard the best player in the NL.

Oh well, I like Ryan Howard, I just don't think the MVP should go to anyone who's team does not make the playoffs.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Why do they vote all the way down to tenth? Isn't a top five good enough?

It's baseball. This is important work here.

[stevew]

I'm sure this thread will get ruined by the "numbers guys" godspeed. I'm just happy a guy I like won, although I could certainly see pujols, berkman and Beltran as all quality canidates.

[MizzouRah]

Come to think of it, Howard had 46 more at bats than Pujols and the only stats he's better in was HR's - 9 more, Hits - 5, and RBI - 12.

Blah.... whatever....

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Blah.... whatever....

quoted for truth

awards just don't do it for me. like I care about who various writers think are the best.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Come to think of it, Howard had 46 more at bats than Pujols and the only stats he's better in was HR's - 9 more, Hits - 5, and RBI - 12.

Blah.... whatever....

I was talking more like range factors and q percentages and vorp and era inflated obp. That kind of shit.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by stevew

I was talking more like range factors and q percentages and vorp and era inflated obp. That kind of shit.

I posted before I saw that post of yours.

I like Ryan Howard quite a bit, hell, he went to school close to where I live.. I just hate it that baseball has silly awards like this when they should split it up.

Same with the Cy Young and closers being considered. Not my cup of tea I suppose.

[JimmyWint]

Howard was the top choice IMO. Look at all of the pressure games he played in. Philadelphia was fighting the whole 2nd half to get that wild card spot. Meanwhile St. Louis coasted all season until the last few games when they almost blew it. Take nothing away from Big Albert, he is amazing, but for this past season I felt Howard (in his first full season) almost willed the Phillies to the playoffs himself.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

They still need a separate award for best player and MVP. Pujols should be the MVP and Howard the best player in the NL.

Why? Pujols should have won both . I think Pujols was the Most Valuable Player and Best Player in the NL this year.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Why? Pujols should have won both . I think Pujols was the Most Valuable Player and Best Player in the NL this year.

I won't argue with you.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by JimmyWint

Howard was the top choice IMO. Look at all of the pressure games he played in. Philadelphia was fighting the whole 2nd half to get that wild card spot. Meanwhile St. Louis coasted all season until the last few games when they almost blew it. Take nothing away from Big Albert, he is amazing, but for this past season I felt Howard (in his first full season) almost willed the Phillies to the playoffs himself.

Key word: almost.

You don't get brownie points for trying.

It's hard to begrudge Howard his award, but I really feel like Pujols should have won it.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

They still need a separate award for best player and MVP. Pujols should be the MVP and Howard the best player in the NL.

Oh well, I like Ryan Howard, I just don't think the MVP should go to anyone who's team does not make the playoffs.

Wrong. Pujols was the best player, and should have been the MVP. Nonetheless, this whole playoff thing is absurd - all it does is eliminate perfectly valuable players for no good reason.

[Crapshoot]

Dola, this is a rare time I find myself in agreement with SackAttack.

[stevew]

Howard also has a much lower disconnect percentage in madden06. That stat matters too.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Wrong. Pujols was the best player, and should have been the MVP. Nonetheless, this whole playoff thing is absurd - all it does is eliminate perfectly valuable players for no good reason.

Hence the need for a separate award.

[rewissick]

Originally Posted by stevew

I was talking more like range factors and q percentages and vorp and era inflated obp. That kind of shit.

What's wrong with being a "numbers guy", as you put it? The article you posted has all sorts of numbers listed. I will never understand the backlash against trying to find a new way to quantify a player's contribution on the diamond.

Look, at some point in the past there were no stats what so ever. Then somebody came along and invented those cherished, time-honored 'traditional' stats that are peppered in the first post. They were the best tool for years, but I think it's pretty obvious that you can't measure a ballplayer's worth with just the usual average, HR, RBI, SB line.

It's all in the name of trying to figure out who's the better/best player, right? So why is it such a stretch to think that we can't invent a better mouse-trap?

I like Howard, and post season hardware is nice to have on your free agency resume, but I think Pujols got the shaft here.

[DanGarion]

Albert Pujols should receive the MVP award every season until he retires, there is no other player comparable to him.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Dola, this is a rare time I find myself in agreement with SackAttack.

I wasn't aware we had a conflict issue.

I'm a Capricorn, for what that's worth.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by dangarion

Edwin Ryan should receive the MVP award every season until he retires, there is no other player comparable to him.

fixed it for you.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by rewissick

What's wrong with being a "numbers guy", as you put it? The article you posted has all sorts of numbers listed. I will never understand the backlash against trying to find a new way to quantify a player's contribution on the diamond.

Look, at some point in the past there were no stats what so ever. Then somebody came along and invented those cherished, time-honored 'traditional' stats that are peppered in the first post. They were the best tool for years, but I think it's pretty obvious that you can't measure a ballplayer's worth with just the usual average, HR, RBI, SB line.

It's all in the name of trying to figure out who's the better/best player, right? So why is it such a stretch to think that we can't invent a better mouse-trap?

I like Howard, and post season hardware is nice to have on your free agency resume, but I think Pujols got the shaft here.

I think Cy Young should be based solely on Wins and MVP based solely on HRs plus RBIs. Because there are no other stats worthy of comparison.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by stevew

fixed it for you.

Edwin Ryan is an overrated sack of shit.

Will you trade him to me?

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

They still need a separate award for best player and MVP. Pujols should be the MVP and Howard the best player in the NL.

Oh well, I like Ryan Howard, I just don't think the MVP should go to anyone who's team does not make the playoffs.

Right, Albert Pujols is more valuable to the St. Louis Cardinals than Howard is to the Phillies because the Phillies are in the same division as the Mets.

I don't buy this argument with Howard's team finished with a better record than Pujols' while the Cards were in a weaker division.

[Hammer755]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

They still need a separate award for best player and MVP. Pujols should be the MVP and Howard the best player in the NL.

I've never understood this argument. Isn't the most valuable player the one who had the best season?

[Hammer755]

Dola

And they already have an award for offensive player of the year - Hank Aaron Award

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Hammer755

I've never understood this argument. Isn't the most valuable player the one who had the best season?

Nope.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Why do they vote all the way down to tenth? Isn't a top five good enough?

Some guys have contract clauses that will give them extra cash for finishing in the Top 10 someplace. That's probably not why they still vote to the Top 10, but...I'm sure it's an incentive to keep it going that way.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Hammer755

Dola

And they already have an award for offensive player of the year - Hank Aaron Award

Ok, give that to Howard.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by mckerney

Right, Albert Pujols is more valuable to the St. Louis Cardinals than Howard is to the Phillies because the Phillies are in the same division as the Mets.

I don't buy this argument with Howard's team finished with a better record than Pujols' while the Cards were in a weaker division.

It's a good argument for sure and both are very deserving... but to me, it is what it is. One pushed his team into the postseason and the other didn't.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

It's a good argument for sure and both are very deserving... but to me, it is what it is. One pushed his team into the postseason and the other didn't.

Todd, I like you, and think Pujols should have won - but this is absurd.

Consider the scenario:
Two teams are tied, going into the last day.
Team 1's best player is hitting .350/.550/.700
Team 2's best player is hitting .290/.440/.550

Team 2 wins the final game, 1-0. Player A went 3/3, Player B went 0/3.

Under your reasoning, Player B is the MVP. Is this not absurd?

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Todd, I like you, and think Pujols should have won - but this is absurd.

Consider the scenario:
Two teams are tied, going into the last day.
Team 1's best player is hitting .350/.550/.700
Team 2's best player is hitting .290/.440/.550

Team 2 wins the final game, 1-0. Player A went 3/3, Player B went 0/3.

Under your reasoning, Player B is the MVP. Is this not absurd?

I like you too, BUT c'mon I'm not just talking about the last week of baseball, I'm talking the WHOLE season.

Of course I watched Pujols every game and saw how he carried this team on his back many games this year. Without him, no playoffs this year.

I'm not taking anything away from Howard though, he is one hell of a player.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

I like you too, BUT c'mon I'm not just talking about the last week of baseball, I'm talking the WHOLE season.

Of course I watched Pujols every game and saw how he carried this team on his back many games this year. Without him, no playoffs this year.

I'm not taking anything away from Howard though, he is one hell of a player.

Right - my point is simply that by basing it simply on the marginal impact of the guy who went to the playoffs or not, you're essentially reducing it to that - a vastly superior player is "not" the MVP because a lesser player was on a playoff team. Pujols in this case was an example of the vastly superior player who DID make the playoffs - the fact that he didn't win is more of a surprise in that regard.

[ctmason]

"It is what it is," is the best way to look at this stuff. I've never found it particularly insightful, other than looking good on HoF plaques.

Take it for what it is, a group of baseball writers (with the Web site of a 12 year old) who think a certain guy is the best player. The whole "most valuable to the team or best player" argument is just a waste of time.

It doesn't affect anything other than publicity for a certain player, and just looking at this year's results, I don't think any of those top five guys (Pujols especially) are hurting for publicity.

Let's just say both these guys, heck all TEN of those guys up there had great seasons and wait until pitchers and catchers report, shall we?

A lot more interesting storylines than this nonsense in Major League Baseball.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Right - my point is simply that by basing it simply on the marginal impact of the guy who went to the playoffs or not, you're essentially reducing it to that - a vastly superior player is "not" the MVP because a lesser player was on a playoff team. Pujols in this case was an example of the vastly superior player who DID make the playoffs - the fact that he didn't win is more of a surprise in that regard.

"Vastly" superior? I'm guessing you're using the ballpark adjusted stuff here? Cause I would probably agree that Pujols did have better numbers in some of the more important categories. And the fact that his team won their division traditionally would have meant that he should have won the award.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Hammer755

Dola

And they already have an award for offensive player of the year - Hank Aaron Award

I was wondering when this would come up. Yes, it's not as prestigious as it's much newer but there is now a "best hitter" award.

SI

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

It's a good argument for sure and both are very deserving... but to me, it is what it is. One pushed his team into the postseason and the other didn't.

I'd be more apt to agree that Pujols deserved to be the MVP over Howard due to making the post season if the Cardinals hadn't made the post season by way of being in the worst division in all of baseball. An 83-78 is 13th best in the majors, and the record would get them no higher than 3rd in any other division, and is good for a 4th place finish in the AL East and Central. Add into that the fact that even with an unbalanced schedule with 4 sub .500 teams in the NL Central, they still didn't finish with a better record than the Phillies.

It would also be different if the Phillies were a team with a mediocre record that was completely out of contention, but isn't there something to be said for the value of player who kept his team in the playoff race, though ultimately there wasn't enough talent around him, along with a player who was on a more talented team and was the difference maker between a playoff spot and merely being in contention?

I just don't like the deciding factor between two players for the MVP being who made the playoffs, when if the Phillies played in the NL Central and the Cardinals being in the NL East it would be the Phillies in the playoffs and the Cards on the outside looking in.