"Edited to add, can you imagine all the poster ( posters) in this thread in a bar?"
Would be fun. I wonder what type of bar would be the preferred choice of most ?.
A Neighborhood Bar: bland atmosphere, limited selection, reasonable prices B Singles Bar: stimulating atmosphere, good selection, high prices C Hotel Bar: classy atmosphere, good selection, very high prices D Dance Club: noisy atmosphere, trendy selection, high prices E Downtown Bar: hectic atmosphre, very good selection, high prices F Juice Bar: healthy atmosphere, poor selection, questionable prices G Biker Bar: rowdy atmosphere, limited selction, reasonable prices H Gay Bar: queer atmosphere, good selection, high prices I Redneck Bar: hillbilly atmosphere, limited selection, reasonable prices J College Bar: school atmosphere, limited selection, reasonable prices K Gentleman's Club: very stimulating atmosphere, very limited selection, very high prices L Restaurant Bar: bloated atmosphere, good selection, high prices M Sports Bar: TV sports atmosphere, good selection, high prices
Responsible Drinking + Baseball Talk = Fun Shares
This aint no party,... this aint no disco,.. this aint no fooling around.
i didnt realize ryan howard was such a big dude till that little pip squeak guy interviewed him tonight lol
howard or cole-tomorrow will tell the story +1 for the pitcher tonght with 1 home run in his career-grreat time to smack that sucker out back to back howard and him
My Allen and Ginter autograph redemption from topps was supposed to be shipped Oct 3rd..I still have not gotten it...what is the chances I will get it before the Phillies wrap this thing up?
He's not even the MVP of his own team, let alone the league. That honor should be going to Pujols and it shouldn't even be close. 14th in the league in OPS (Utley was 8th), 6th in the league in SLG (Utley 8th), 49th in OBP (Utley 13th), 1st in HR (Utley 9th), K's #2 with 199 (Utley 41st). Other than the home runs and a slight edge in SLG, Utley outperformed Howard in every single individual statistical category (no, runs and RBI are a factor of the team and not solely the player).
Pujols, on the other hand, was #1 in the NL in OPS (1.114) to Howard's .881; SLG Pujols, again, #1 at .653 to Howard's .543; OBP Pujols finished .008 behind Chipper for #2, Howard (as noted above) was 49th; only 2 people struck out less than Pujols this year, he struck out 54 times (2 others had 53); only Adam Dunn walked more than Pujols; Pujols finished 4th in HR; hell Pujols finished 4th in doubles. More interesting stats, runs created, Pujols again #1 (Howard 13th), Value over replacement player? Pujols again #1 while Howard was 30th.
People get hung up on numbers like HR and RBI as if they are the end-all, be all, when, in fact, they give a very distorted perspective. Pujols had by far the most dominating season in the NL. It's not as if the Cardinals were terrible, they finished 10 games above .500 and if they had been in the soft NL east, they would likely have won more games. Anyways, you can't penalize Pujols for not pitching as the Phils' pitching staff was significantly better.
Anyways, to you fans saying Howard should be MVP, you definitely are excited about the world series win (and rightfully so), but to suggest Howard for MVP over Pujols is ludicrous.
He's not even the MVP of his own team, let alone the league. That honor should be going to Pujols and it shouldn't even be close. 14th in the league in OPS (Utley was 8th), 6th in the league in SLG (Utley 8th), 49th in OBP (Utley 13th), 1st in HR (Utley 9th), K's #2 with 199 (Utley 41st). Other than the home runs and a slight edge in SLG, Utley outperformed Howard in every single individual statistical category (no, runs and RBI are a factor of the team and not solely the player).
Pujols, on the other hand, was #1 in the NL in OPS (1.114) to Howard's .881; SLG Pujols, again, #1 at .653 to Howard's .543; OBP Pujols finished .008 behind Chipper for #2, Howard (as noted above) was 49th; only 2 people struck out less than Pujols this year, he struck out 54 times (2 others had 53); only Adam Dunn walked more than Pujols; Pujols finished 4th in HR; hell Pujols finished 4th in doubles. More interesting stats, runs created, Pujols again #1 (Howard 13th), Value over replacement player? Pujols again #1 while Howard was 30th.
People get hung up on numbers like HR and RBI as if they are the end-all, be all, when, in fact, they give a very distorted perspective. Pujols had by far the most dominating season in the NL. It's not as if the Cardinals were terrible, they finished 10 games above .500 and if they had been in the soft NL east, they would likely have won more games. Anyways, you can't penalize Pujols for not pitching as the Phils' pitching staff was significantly better.
Anyways, to you fans saying Howard should be MVP, you definitely are excited about the world series win (and rightfully so), but to suggest Howard for MVP over Pujols is ludicrous. >>
Hello Gary Fandango alt. Go to bed. The Phils are World Champs!!!!!!
The true sign of an MVP is what his team does at the end of the year, and Ryan Howard and the Philles stand alone as the class of MLB.
Heres to the Phils and the 2008 MVP. >>
Congrats to the Phillies and their fans. You guys waited longer than the Cardinals between WS wins. It feels pretty good doesn't it?
Now, to address the above. I didn't just drop in from nowhere, so I think I should have a little bit of credibility. A true sign of an MVP is what the player does for his team, not what his team does at the end of the year. It is not Albert Pujols' fault that the Cardinals didn't make the playoffs. I think it is absolutely ludicrous to devalue what a player does based on how his team finished in the standings.
Back in 2006, I did not say that Pujols should have won the MVP because the Cardinals made the playoffs and the Phillies didn't. I just thought that Pujols should have won based on what the 2 players did. However, I did think that an argument could be made for Howard in 2006. That being said, I think Pujols deserves it this year over Howard more than in 2006. Way more. The MVP is not the "Player with most HR and RBI award". It's not the "Player that gets hot at the end of the year, but stunk at the beginning award". It's not the "best and hottest player on the team that made the playoffs award". It is the "Most Valuable Player Award". There is no other way to determine "value" except to look at what the PLAYER did, not what his team did or didn't do. If you look at what Pujols did in every offensive in defensive category, it dwarfs what Ryan Howard did this year.
Ryan Howard was not the best or most valuable player on his own team in 2008...any way you slice it. Hamels, Lidge, and Utley all eclipsed him by leaps and bounds. It is great comparing him to his own teammates, because then the fans cannot use that dumb and flawed method of where the team finishes as some criteria of 'value'. Once the flawed method of using where the team finished is washed away(as it should be), then there are many within the league that eclipse him as well.
It is a good thing that the MVP of the series was not the guy who had the most RBI in the series, but the guy who actually merited the award!
Thank you MLB for having some brains and knowing that the RBI leader does not equate to the 'value' leader! They actually gave the award to the guy who was the most responsible for wins.
In the regular season, Utley, Hamels, and Lidge were all more responsible for wins too.
Utley's play last night is a great indicator of why his defensive value is soo much higher than Howards, that it is silly to compare the two...and when you consider that Utley's offensive value is also higher, anyone but the biggest of mops can only believe that Howard is more valuable or better.
Without Howard down the stretch the phils don't even get to The playoffs. He carried the team on his back into the Post season. Milwaukee pitchers were scared or him and Pitched around him giving better pitches to the guy around him.
Pujols isn't even close, nice stars but he didn't carry his Anywhere..... Well except for the couch!
<< <i>Without Howard down the stretch the phils don't even get to The playoffs. He carried the team on his back into the Post season. Milwaukee pitchers were scared or him and Pitched around him giving better pitches to the guy around him.
Pujols isn't even close, nice stars but he didn't carry his Anywhere..... Well except for the couch!
Js >>
That is an unbelievable statement - that say that Pujols is even close.
Dallas had a great post on the 'without Howard's September, blah' rationale. There are a number of 'without so and so's month' the Phillies would not have gotten into the post season.
Without a number of Chase Utley months or weeks, the Phils would not have gotten there. Without Joe Blanton's September. This can be said for many players on the Phillies.
In totality, which is what really matters, Utley, Hamels, and Lidge simply dwarfed Howard's value to the Phillies.
Howard stepped it up at the exact time that Utley went in a drought. That is what an MVP does. Sure what Lidge did was amazing, but he isn't going to with the MVP for it. Cole SHOULD of been a 20 game winner but wasn't, that cut into his chances. Utley was cold at the end and that is what voters remember. I do agree that the Phils wouldn't be in it if Utley doesn't do what he did, I just think down the stretch (when MVP's shine), Howard did the most. Pujols did nothing at the end, I don't care what his stats were in April, MVP carry their teams into the post season not the couch room. Alberto shut it down early.
<< <i>...down the stretch (when MVP's shine)... >>
And there it is. Despite the great pains the Howard backers went through to point out that the MVP is not defined (when it was the Pujols backers attempting to define MVP), JS's argument depends entirely on the fact that he has defined "MVP" as one who shines down the stretch. That players on bad teams have no "stretch" is unacknowledged, and that there is no reason to define MVP this way is also unacknowledged. That Howard is the MVP is a religion (look up the word if you don't believe me); it is aggressively impervious to logic, facts, or even debate. Howard is the MVP because Howard is the MVP, world without end, Amen.
Choosing a tub o' goo who can't hit lefties and can't play even first base without embarrassing Himself as one's God is your choice in a great country like this, but you just have to realize how ridiculous it makes you look.
And just to avoid our 43rd identical misunderstanding on this point - if you believe that Howard WILL win the MVP because the MVP voters are idiots, then you are using the brains God gave you and I'm not talking to you. If you believe that Howard OUGHT to win the MVP, then you are using the brains God gave amoebas, you are a danger to society if you possess a sharp object and I'd love to learn someday who taught you how to operate a computer, because that person is a GENIUS!
No offense intended, of course.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
n totality, which is what really matters, Utley, Hamels, and Lidge simply dwarfed Howard's value to the Phillies.
That may be true, however the people that actually do the voting will take what he did in the month of September and rightfully or wrongfully give him credit for it.
Funny how you now say Lidge was more valuable then Howard Skip. Last month when I mentioned that his team mates said he was the MVP of the team you argued that meant nothing especially since he was only a closer.
I don't think I said that. I am not researching it either.
I probably said that it was another example of why Howard should not be the MVP...because it is based on the ability of his teammates(using W/L record). The Phillies voting for Lidge shows Howard had a great team...something Pujols did not.
Dallas is right on. He is correct, only an amoeba will not understand what he wrote.
Also, why do these people limit 'down the stretch' to only mean September? What they are doing is just taking a random small slice of the entire season and proclaiming that as the most important.
Using their logic, wouldn't taking the last few games of the season as being most important(or last game), and base the MVP just on that? If they are already discounting APril through August, why not discount all games until games 161 and 162? Why? Because it is just as dumb as just narrowing it down to September! Yet that is what htey do.
Also, Philly fans, did Howard deserve the MVP over Pujols a couple years ago?
Pujols fans are so blind. Beaten on the head too many times by Barry Bonds and all his MVP's. Bitter once again? Yes I think so, remember that Ted Williams once hit .400 over a season...how did that turn out as far as the MVP voting? I thought Alberto was a good guy, until he broke down an cried over not winning it a few years back....actually that is all I remember about that year....what a big cry baby Pujols is...his fans are the same way.
If you think how many homer runs he hit against the Nats and the Braves are important enough to get him the MVP then fine, I have no way to sway you, but if you compare what Howard did to help his team get in versus what Pujols did then you will see my point. Pujols wasn't valuable in that Cubs series when the Cards needed production. As a matter of fact he hit just one home run in the 2 week period before the Cards were eliminated. 1-10 against the Cubs and 2-10 against the Diamond Backs, who they were chasing in the wild card at the time. You call that valuable? Even against the crappy Reds, when they needed him the most he went 1-11. That is 2-23 in 7 games in the middle of September. Is that valuable? NO
Howard will be the clear choice, sorry Pujols fans, another red ribbon!
<< <i>Pujols fans are so blind. Beaten on the head too many times by Barry Bonds and all his MVP's. Bitter once again? Yes I think so, remember that Ted Williams once hit .400 over a season...how did that turn out as far as the MVP voting? I thought Alberto was a good guy, until he broke down an cried over not winning it a few years back....actually that is all I remember about that year....what a big cry baby Pujols is...his fans are the same way.
If you think how many homer runs he hit against the Nats and the Braves are important enough to get him the MVP then fine, I have no way to sway you, but if you compare what Howard did to help his team get in versus what Pujols did then you will see my point. Pujols wasn't valuable in that Cubs series when the Cards needed production. As a matter of fact he hit just one home run in the 2 week period before the Cards were eliminated. 1-10 against the Cubs and 2-10 against the Diamond Backs, who they were chasing in the wild card at the time. You call that valuable? Even against the crappy Reds, when they needed him the most he went 1-11. That is 2-23 in 7 games in the middle of September. Is that valuable? NO
Howard will be the clear choice, sorry Pujols fans, another red ribbon!
JS >>
I am not crying about anything. I am just simply stating a case. Can't I do that without you being so defensive?
To say that Pujols "did nothing" and "shut it down" in September is clearly wrong. In the last 28 days of the season, he batted .338, 7 HR, 25 RBIs, Slugged .730, and had a 1.150 OPS. Hmmm.
One other point I would like to make. I am not making a case for April vs September. I am making a case for the ENTIRE YEAR.
Yeah Pujols saved 8 of those hits for the last 4 games of the season when the Cards were already out of it. If that is what MVP means to you then fine, but voters are going to look at this and clearly see that Howard was more valuable. The guy was unstoppable when the Phillies were chasing the Mets...Phillies got it done, Cards didn't. You don't think Pujols taking off the entire Cubs series had anything to do what that? Are you a cards fan or just a Pujols fan, cause if you were a Cards fan you would of known he was a disapointment down the stretch when they needed him...if you want to award him for what he did in April, then do it, but teams play 169 games a season with only one thing on their minds...post season!
I don't recall anyone other than Pujols fans supporting Pujols for the 2006 MVP, a year in which his team was in the playoffs, and Howard's team was not.
After reading this entire thread, all the Philly fans(and others) that chimed in on this MVP race are left to agree with the following statement, or everything they write or say is completely worthless and contradictory.
**Albert pujols deserved the 2006 MVP becasue the Cardinals made the playoffs, and Howard's team did not. Howard should not have won it .***
Yes, speaking for Cardinals fans everywhere, I sure am disappointed that we got stuck with Pujols while the Phillies got Howard. Almost as much as I regret being stuck with Musial for all those years when we could have had Hank Bauer. I mean it's a FACT that the Yankees went to the WS eight times in the 50's with Bauer, and the Cardinals, with Musial, didn't go even once.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
<< <i>Yes, speaking for Cardinals fans everywhere, I sure am disappointed that we got stuck with Pujols while the Phillies got Howard. Almost as much as I regret being stuck with Musial for all those years when we could have had Hank Bauer. I mean it's a FACT that the Yankees went to the WS eight times in the 50's with Bauer, and the Cardinals, with Musial, didn't go even once. >>
WoW, Cards fan is a bitter bitter person right now. Sorry this happened to you!
I appreciate your concern, but I'm not bitter, I'm laughing at you. Seriously, please don't stop enlightening us with your vast stores of baseball knowledge, you are as funny as Ryan Howard playing first base. If you ever did attempt to address my arguments I would probably laugh so hard I'd wet myself. Let's find out - explain to me the difference between Pujols/Howard in 2008 and Musial/Bauer in the 50's, or better yet, answer hoopster and explain why Howard deserved the MVP in 2006. It's hard to predict which would be more entertaining.
As always, no offense intended.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
<< <i>I don't recall anyone other than Pujols fans supporting Pujols for the 2006 MVP, a year in which his team was in the playoffs, and Howard's team was not.
After reading this entire thread, all the Philly fans(and others) that chimed in on this MVP race are left to agree with the following statement, or everything they write or say is completely worthless and contradictory.
**Albert pujols deserved the 2006 MVP becasue the Cardinals made the playoffs, and Howard's team did not. Howard should not have won it .*** >>
While the Cardinals made the playoffs and won the Series that year, the Phillies actually had a better regular season record. The NL central was the weakest division in baseball. Of course this is old news and Howard did win the MVP, so there is nothing to debate. What's done is done.
Let's get back to 2008. It would be nice if Dallasactuary stayed away from personal attacks when attempting to make an argument. Childish tactic used by those who are on shaky ground.
It doesn't matter what is done is done. Based on the criteria you have all put forth of having to be on a playoff team, you can't have Howard winning it in 2006 with Pujols in the Playoffs and Howard not. It directly smacks against what you all have been preaching.
Playing ability wise, in 2006 Howard and Pujols were appx equal at the bat, and Pujols the better fielder. Pujols 'brought' his team to the playoffs, Howard not.
According to your own criteria, Howard should not win the award because he 'failed' to bring his team to the post season. If you start talking about poorer divisions, then you are finally starting to recognize context, but then you seem to ignore the context when the issue of teammates ability are brought up as to the reason WHY a team makes the playoffs or not. Funny, isn't it.
Playing ability wise, in 2008 Pujols dwarfed Howard to such proportions that it is akin to measuring Babe Ruth against Tony Clark. Anyone that dispute that Pujols was a better player has to be the biggest moron on this board. So far, only one moron has said so, but he is not worth replying to. The others are going for Howard due to the playoff factor...but those same people ignore that in 2006?? Hmmm...
DrJ, either you have to speak out against Howard winning the award in 2006, or you have to speak out against him for 2008. You can't have it both ways...unless extreme bias is at work, and in that case go ahead(which renders anything you say worthless than).
There is no point to arguing the past. Once a MVP decision is made by the voters it is here for eternity. We can debate the merits but nothing will change.
Speaking of context, Howard hit 58 HR that season was darn close to hitting a clean 61. In the wake of the McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, Giambi scandal his accomplishment was even further amplified by being a class act.
Making the playoffs should be used in the MVP argument, but it is not the be all and end all.
In 2006 Howard's and Pujols stats were virtually identical, so it really was a toss up going by individual performance alone. Howard's clean HR numbers and the Phils better record was rated higher by the voters than Pujols' numbers and Cardinals lesser record and making the playoffs. End of debate, case closed by the voters.
This year Pujols has better numbers when it comes to average and on base percentage, but Howard has better numbers when it comes to runs realized. The Phils also had a better record and Howard stepped up his game and drove the team to wins at the end of the season while Pujols and the Cards folded like a cheap suit as outlined throughout this thread. Making the playoffs and late season performance may very well be the deciding factor with the voters. We shall see, but it is not as clear cut as the Pujols fanboys say.
DrJ, either you have to speak out against Howard winning the award in 2006, or you have to speak out against him for 2008.
Hoops this is where you lose me, why can't a person have it both ways? Especially since it can be argued that making the post season is but one of a very many criterias used when in deciding who is an MVP.
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>And would all posters here from now on please refer to Howard as Babe Howard. Thank you for your cooperation. >>
I call him "Clutch City" Howard.
Big win in the first game by the way.... >>
Babe "Clutch City" Howard sounds good to me.
Dallas nice spin.
Steve
<< <i>Dallas nice spin. >>
Thank you.
Would be fun.
I wonder what type of bar would be the preferred choice of most ?.
A Neighborhood Bar: bland atmosphere, limited selection, reasonable prices
B Singles Bar: stimulating atmosphere, good selection, high prices
C Hotel Bar: classy atmosphere, good selection, very high prices
D Dance Club: noisy atmosphere, trendy selection, high prices
E Downtown Bar: hectic atmosphre, very good selection, high prices
F Juice Bar: healthy atmosphere, poor selection, questionable prices
G Biker Bar: rowdy atmosphere, limited selction, reasonable prices
H Gay Bar: queer atmosphere, good selection, high prices
I Redneck Bar: hillbilly atmosphere, limited selection, reasonable prices
J College Bar: school atmosphere, limited selection, reasonable prices
K Gentleman's Club: very stimulating atmosphere, very limited selection, very high prices
L Restaurant Bar: bloated atmosphere, good selection, high prices
M Sports Bar: TV sports atmosphere, good selection, high prices
Responsible Drinking + Baseball Talk = Fun Shares
Howard just powered another HR in the World Series for his second in as many nights.
He also received an intentional walk. So quickly things change.....
its close, but Ill take Howard and the 3 run bomb.
js
This guy keeps performing in the Clutch.
Clutch City Howard strikes again!!!!!
JS
Please lay off the Big Macs before you look like Tony Gwynn.
Sincerely,
Cecil Fielder
<< <i>but a nice well-educated ball player who can use the English language >>
I thought you were going to say well-rounded!!
Who thought Ryan would be a good spokesman for Subway?
howard or cole-tomorrow will tell the story
+1 for the pitcher tonght with 1 home run in his career-grreat time to smack that sucker out
back to back howard and him
Phillies wrap this thing up?
Kevin
The true sign of an MVP is what his team does at the end of the year, and Ryan Howard and the Philles stand alone as the class of MLB.
Heres to the Phils and the 2008 MVP.
Kidding, right?
He's not even the MVP of his own team, let alone the league. That honor should be going to Pujols and it shouldn't even be close. 14th in the league in OPS (Utley was 8th), 6th in the league in SLG (Utley 8th), 49th in OBP (Utley 13th), 1st in HR (Utley 9th), K's #2 with 199 (Utley 41st). Other than the home runs and a slight edge in SLG, Utley outperformed Howard in every single individual statistical category (no, runs and RBI are a factor of the team and not solely the player).
Pujols, on the other hand, was #1 in the NL in OPS (1.114) to Howard's .881; SLG Pujols, again, #1 at .653 to Howard's .543; OBP Pujols finished .008 behind Chipper for #2, Howard (as noted above) was 49th; only 2 people struck out less than Pujols this year, he struck out 54 times (2 others had 53); only Adam Dunn walked more than Pujols; Pujols finished 4th in HR; hell Pujols finished 4th in doubles. More interesting stats, runs created, Pujols again #1 (Howard 13th), Value over replacement player? Pujols again #1 while Howard was 30th.
People get hung up on numbers like HR and RBI as if they are the end-all, be all, when, in fact, they give a very distorted perspective. Pujols had by far the most dominating season in the NL. It's not as if the Cardinals were terrible, they finished 10 games above .500 and if they had been in the soft NL east, they would likely have won more games. Anyways, you can't penalize Pujols for not pitching as the Phils' pitching staff was significantly better.
Anyways, to you fans saying Howard should be MVP, you definitely are excited about the world series win (and rightfully so), but to suggest Howard for MVP over Pujols is ludicrous.
<< <i>Ryan Howard, MVP?
Kidding, right?
He's not even the MVP of his own team, let alone the league. That honor should be going to Pujols and it shouldn't even be close. 14th in the league in OPS (Utley was 8th), 6th in the league in SLG (Utley 8th), 49th in OBP (Utley 13th), 1st in HR (Utley 9th), K's #2 with 199 (Utley 41st). Other than the home runs and a slight edge in SLG, Utley outperformed Howard in every single individual statistical category (no, runs and RBI are a factor of the team and not solely the player).
Pujols, on the other hand, was #1 in the NL in OPS (1.114) to Howard's .881; SLG Pujols, again, #1 at .653 to Howard's .543; OBP Pujols finished .008 behind Chipper for #2, Howard (as noted above) was 49th; only 2 people struck out less than Pujols this year, he struck out 54 times (2 others had 53); only Adam Dunn walked more than Pujols; Pujols finished 4th in HR; hell Pujols finished 4th in doubles. More interesting stats, runs created, Pujols again #1 (Howard 13th), Value over replacement player? Pujols again #1 while Howard was 30th.
People get hung up on numbers like HR and RBI as if they are the end-all, be all, when, in fact, they give a very distorted perspective. Pujols had by far the most dominating season in the NL. It's not as if the Cardinals were terrible, they finished 10 games above .500 and if they had been in the soft NL east, they would likely have won more games. Anyways, you can't penalize Pujols for not pitching as the Phils' pitching staff was significantly better.
Anyways, to you fans saying Howard should be MVP, you definitely are excited about the world series win (and rightfully so), but to suggest Howard for MVP over Pujols is ludicrous. >>
Hello Gary Fandango alt. Go to bed. The Phils are World Champs!!!!!!
I just love how a guy just drops in from out of no where.
Steve
I wouldn't say he is the best, but I would say a case for most valuable could be made.
Steve
<< <i>To the top for the 2008 World Champions.
The true sign of an MVP is what his team does at the end of the year, and Ryan Howard and the Philles stand alone as the class of MLB.
Heres to the Phils and the 2008 MVP. >>
Congrats to the Phillies and their fans. You guys waited longer than the Cardinals between WS wins. It feels pretty good doesn't it?
Now, to address the above. I didn't just drop in from nowhere, so I think I should have a little bit of credibility. A true sign of an MVP is what the player does for his team, not what his team does at the end of the year. It is not Albert Pujols' fault that the Cardinals didn't make the playoffs. I think it is absolutely ludicrous to devalue what a player does based on how his team finished in the standings.
Back in 2006, I did not say that Pujols should have won the MVP because the Cardinals made the playoffs and the Phillies didn't. I just thought that Pujols should have won based on what the 2 players did. However, I did think that an argument could be made for Howard in 2006. That being said, I think Pujols deserves it this year over Howard more than in 2006. Way more. The MVP is not the "Player with most HR and RBI award". It's not the "Player that gets hot at the end of the year, but stunk at the beginning award". It's not the "best and hottest player on the team that made the playoffs award". It is the "Most Valuable Player Award". There is no other way to determine "value" except to look at what the PLAYER did, not what his team did or didn't do. If you look at what Pujols did in every offensive in defensive category, it dwarfs what Ryan Howard did this year.
Shane
or Hoopster or Dallas.
Steve
It is a good thing that the MVP of the series was not the guy who had the most RBI in the series, but the guy who actually merited the award!
Thank you MLB for having some brains and knowing that the RBI leader does not equate to the 'value' leader! They actually gave the award to the guy who was the most responsible for wins.
In the regular season, Utley, Hamels, and Lidge were all more responsible for wins too.
Utley's play last night is a great indicator of why his defensive value is soo much higher than Howards, that it is silly to compare the two...and when you consider that Utley's offensive value is also higher, anyone but the biggest of mops can only believe that Howard is more valuable or better.
<< <i>I guess the first post and alt name threw me Shane. I should have known it was you......
or Hoopster or Dallas.
Steve >>
I hope you were joking. (You are talking about the Steinman post, right?)
Shane
The playoffs. He carried the team on his back into the
Post season. Milwaukee pitchers were scared or him and
Pitched around him giving better pitches to the guy around him.
Pujols isn't even close, nice stars but he didn't carry his
Anywhere..... Well except for the couch!
Js
<< <i>Without Howard down the stretch the phils don't even get to
The playoffs. He carried the team on his back into the
Post season. Milwaukee pitchers were scared or him and
Pitched around him giving better pitches to the guy around him.
Pujols isn't even close, nice stars but he didn't carry his
Anywhere..... Well except for the couch!
Js >>
That is an unbelievable statement - that say that Pujols is even close.
Shane
Without a number of Chase Utley months or weeks, the Phils would not have gotten there. Without Joe Blanton's September. This can be said for many players on the Phillies.
In totality, which is what really matters, Utley, Hamels, and Lidge simply dwarfed Howard's value to the Phillies.
come on now, you know thats not true; its not even close lol
to with the MVP for it. Cole SHOULD of been a 20 game winner but wasn't, that cut into his chances. Utley was cold at the end and that is what voters
remember. I do agree that the Phils wouldn't be in it if Utley doesn't do what he did, I just think down the stretch (when MVP's shine), Howard did the
most. Pujols did nothing at the end, I don't care what his stats were in April, MVP carry their teams into the post season not the couch room. Alberto
shut it down early.
JS
<< <i>...down the stretch (when MVP's shine)... >>
And there it is. Despite the great pains the Howard backers went through to point out that the MVP is not defined (when it was the Pujols backers attempting to define MVP), JS's argument depends entirely on the fact that he has defined "MVP" as one who shines down the stretch. That players on bad teams have no "stretch" is unacknowledged, and that there is no reason to define MVP this way is also unacknowledged. That Howard is the MVP is a religion (look up the word if you don't believe me); it is aggressively impervious to logic, facts, or even debate. Howard is the MVP because Howard is the MVP, world without end, Amen.
Choosing a tub o' goo who can't hit lefties and can't play even first base without embarrassing Himself as one's God is your choice in a great country like this, but you just have to realize how ridiculous it makes you look.
And just to avoid our 43rd identical misunderstanding on this point - if you believe that Howard WILL win the MVP because the MVP voters are idiots, then you are using the brains God gave you and I'm not talking to you. If you believe that Howard OUGHT to win the MVP, then you are using the brains God gave amoebas, you are a danger to society if you possess a sharp object and I'd love to learn someday who taught you how to operate a computer, because that person is a GENIUS!
No offense intended, of course.
Depends on what one thinks 'ought' means.
Steve
Of course i'm joking.
Steve
That may be true, however the people that actually do the voting will take what he did in the month of September
and rightfully or wrongfully give him credit for it.
People forget what players did in April.
Steve
his team mates said he was the MVP of the team you argued that meant nothing especially since he was only a closer.
Steve
I don't think I said that. I am not researching it either.
I probably said that it was another example of why Howard should not be the MVP...because it is based on the ability of his teammates(using W/L record). The Phillies voting for Lidge shows Howard had a great team...something Pujols did not.
Dallas is right on. He is correct, only an amoeba will not understand what he wrote.
Also, why do these people limit 'down the stretch' to only mean September? What they are doing is just taking a random small slice of the entire season and proclaiming that as the most important.
Using their logic, wouldn't taking the last few games of the season as being most important(or last game), and base the MVP just on that? If they are already discounting APril through August, why not discount all games until games 161 and 162? Why? Because it is just as dumb as just narrowing it down to September! Yet that is what htey do.
Also, Philly fans, did Howard deserve the MVP over Pujols a couple years ago?
Why do people think that September is more important? IMO it is because the games seem more important and the season is winding down.
I agree that games in April mean as much as games in September but, and this is a big but, in September everything is magnified.
Howard did get hot at the right time and carried his team on his back (so says his manager) as the games dwindled down to a precious few.
Just like anything people remember what you did lately for them, not what you did 5 months ago.
IMO Howard 'COULD' win it, as could Pujols, Sabathia, Rameriez. It will be an interesting vote.
I'm thinking that the 1st place votes will get divided up so much that the guy with the most 2nd place votes could win it.
We could also see a co-MVP situation ala 1979.
Steve
once hit .400 over a season...how did that turn out as far as the MVP voting? I thought Alberto was a good guy, until he broke down an cried over not
winning it a few years back....actually that is all I remember about that year....what a big cry baby Pujols is...his fans are the same way.
If you think how many homer runs he hit against the Nats and the Braves are important enough to get him the MVP then fine, I have no way to sway you, but
if you compare what Howard did to help his team get in versus what Pujols did then you will see my point. Pujols wasn't valuable in that Cubs series when
the Cards needed production. As a matter of fact he hit just one home run in the 2 week period before the Cards were eliminated. 1-10 against the Cubs
and 2-10 against the Diamond Backs, who they were chasing in the wild card at the time. You call that valuable? Even against the crappy Reds, when they
needed him the most he went 1-11. That is 2-23 in 7 games in the middle of September. Is that valuable? NO
Howard will be the clear choice, sorry Pujols fans, another red ribbon!
JS
<< <i>Pujols fans are so blind. Beaten on the head too many times by Barry Bonds and all his MVP's. Bitter once again? Yes I think so, remember that Ted Williams
once hit .400 over a season...how did that turn out as far as the MVP voting? I thought Alberto was a good guy, until he broke down an cried over not
winning it a few years back....actually that is all I remember about that year....what a big cry baby Pujols is...his fans are the same way.
If you think how many homer runs he hit against the Nats and the Braves are important enough to get him the MVP then fine, I have no way to sway you, but
if you compare what Howard did to help his team get in versus what Pujols did then you will see my point. Pujols wasn't valuable in that Cubs series when
the Cards needed production. As a matter of fact he hit just one home run in the 2 week period before the Cards were eliminated. 1-10 against the Cubs
and 2-10 against the Diamond Backs, who they were chasing in the wild card at the time. You call that valuable? Even against the crappy Reds, when they
needed him the most he went 1-11. That is 2-23 in 7 games in the middle of September. Is that valuable? NO
Howard will be the clear choice, sorry Pujols fans, another red ribbon!
JS >>
I am not crying about anything. I am just simply stating a case. Can't I do that without you being so defensive?
To say that Pujols "did nothing" and "shut it down" in September is clearly wrong. In the last 28 days of the season, he batted .338, 7 HR, 25 RBIs, Slugged .730, and had a 1.150 OPS. Hmmm.
One other point I would like to make. I am not making a case for April vs September. I am making a case for the ENTIRE YEAR.
Shane
voters are going to look at this and clearly see that Howard was more valuable. The guy was unstoppable when the Phillies were chasing the Mets...Phillies
got it done, Cards didn't. You don't think Pujols taking off the entire Cubs series had anything to do what that? Are you a cards fan or just a Pujols fan, cause
if you were a Cards fan you would of known he was a disapointment down the stretch when they needed him...if you want to award him for what he did
in April, then do it, but teams play 169 games a season with only one thing on their minds...post season!
JS
After reading this entire thread, all the Philly fans(and others) that chimed in on this MVP race are left to agree with the following statement, or everything they write or say is completely worthless and contradictory.
**Albert pujols deserved the 2006 MVP becasue the Cardinals made the playoffs, and Howard's team did not. Howard should not have won it .***
<< <i>Yes, speaking for Cardinals fans everywhere, I sure am disappointed that we got stuck with Pujols while the Phillies got Howard. Almost as much as I regret being stuck with Musial for all those years when we could have had Hank Bauer. I mean it's a FACT that the Yankees went to the WS eight times in the 50's with Bauer, and the Cardinals, with Musial, didn't go even once. >>
WoW, Cards fan is a bitter bitter person right now. Sorry this happened to you!
JS
As always, no offense intended.
<< <i>I don't recall anyone other than Pujols fans supporting Pujols for the 2006 MVP, a year in which his team was in the playoffs, and Howard's team was not.
After reading this entire thread, all the Philly fans(and others) that chimed in on this MVP race are left to agree with the following statement, or everything they write or say is completely worthless and contradictory.
**Albert pujols deserved the 2006 MVP becasue the Cardinals made the playoffs, and Howard's team did not. Howard should not have won it .*** >>
While the Cardinals made the playoffs and won the Series that year, the Phillies actually had a better regular season record. The NL central was the weakest division in baseball. Of course this is old news and Howard did win the MVP, so there is nothing to debate. What's done is done.
Let's get back to 2008. It would be nice if Dallasactuary stayed away from personal attacks when attempting to make an argument. Childish tactic used by those who are on shaky ground.
2006
Howard>Pujols
2008
Howard>Pujols
I hope I had have the little symbol thingy the right way, I actually slept through math in college (only went to a state school).
Let me know if you need some Bonds reasons too....sorry the only things I know about Bauer is what my grand daddy told me.
Kevin
It doesn't matter what is done is done. Based on the criteria you have all put forth of having to be on a playoff team, you can't have Howard winning it in 2006 with Pujols in the Playoffs and Howard not. It directly smacks against what you all have been preaching.
Playing ability wise, in 2006 Howard and Pujols were appx equal at the bat, and Pujols the better fielder. Pujols 'brought' his team to the playoffs, Howard not.
According to your own criteria, Howard should not win the award because he 'failed' to bring his team to the post season. If you start talking about poorer divisions, then you are finally starting to recognize context, but then you seem to ignore the context when the issue of teammates ability are brought up as to the reason WHY a team makes the playoffs or not. Funny, isn't it.
Playing ability wise, in 2008 Pujols dwarfed Howard to such proportions that it is akin to measuring Babe Ruth against Tony Clark. Anyone that dispute that Pujols was a better player has to be the biggest moron on this board. So far, only one moron has said so, but he is not worth replying to. The others are going for Howard due to the playoff factor...but those same people ignore that in 2006?? Hmmm...
DrJ, either you have to speak out against Howard winning the award in 2006, or you have to speak out against him for 2008. You can't have it both ways...unless extreme bias is at work, and in that case go ahead(which renders anything you say worthless than).
There is no point to arguing the past. Once a MVP decision is made by the voters it is here for eternity. We can debate the merits but nothing will change.
Speaking of context, Howard hit 58 HR that season was darn close to hitting a clean 61. In the wake of the McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, Giambi scandal his accomplishment was even further amplified by being a class act.
Making the playoffs should be used in the MVP argument, but it is not the be all and end all.
In 2006 Howard's and Pujols stats were virtually identical, so it really was a toss up going by individual performance alone. Howard's clean HR numbers and the Phils better record was rated higher by the voters than Pujols' numbers and Cardinals lesser record and making the playoffs. End of debate, case closed by the voters.
This year Pujols has better numbers when it comes to average and on base percentage, but Howard has better numbers when it comes to runs realized. The Phils also had a better record and Howard stepped up his game and drove the team to wins at the end of the season while Pujols and the Cards folded like a cheap suit as outlined throughout this thread. Making the playoffs and late season performance may very well be the deciding factor with the voters. We shall see, but it is not as clear cut as the Pujols fanboys say.
Howard may win it as well.
Steve
DrJ, either you have to speak out against Howard winning the award in 2006, or you have to speak out against him for 2008.
Hoops this is where you lose me, why can't a person have it both ways? Especially since it can be argued that making the post season is but one of a very many
criterias used when in deciding who is an MVP.
Steve