November 20, 2006

So this means Ortiz wins for the AL then?

posted by jerseygirl at 02:06 PM on November 20, 2006

58 homers, 149 RBI's, .313 BA, and he carried a team to the brink of the playoffs. Though you make a very compelling argument. Pujols: 49 homers, 137 RBI's, .339 BA, despite missing almost a month, has put up those numbers consistently since entering the league, AND carried his team (especially the first two months of the season) to their first World Championship in 20+ years. Compelling enough for ya?

posted by mjkredliner at 02:30 PM on November 20, 2006

Here's a table comparing Howard and Pujols from Viva el Birdos, a Cardinals blog (red (obviously) represents the player with the better statistics in the given category):

Full post with additional context and analysis is here.

posted by holden at 02:34 PM on November 20, 2006

The award does not cover post-season performance. Already filed under BS. A-Rod winning with the last place Rangers is there, too.

posted by mjkredliner at 03:20 PM on November 20, 2006

Actually, Pujols didn't have a great post-season by his high standards -- he only hit .288/.439/.519. (On preview, looks like mjkredliner hit this point.) A more compelling argument for his candidacy over Howard is his Gold Glove defense at first, where Howard was in the bottom third based on most defensive metrics.

posted by holden at 03:31 PM on November 20, 2006

Pujols: 49 homers, 137 RBI's, .339 BA, despite missing almost a month Who cares. Injuries are part of the game. Maybe Pujols would have had a horrible month if he hadn't been injured. You can't just give him extra credit because he couldn't stay healthy. But an outstanding post-season (not that Albert had on one) should ice it for a candidiate who does make it to the post season over one who does not. You might as well just make up the mjk award. Adding this and that to the award changes it into something completely different.

posted by justgary at 03:47 PM on November 20, 2006

I'm sure Albert will take the ring over the MVP hardware.

posted by mjkredliner at 03:59 PM on November 20, 2006

Uh... wait... Grum? ... Come back... You are an evil stats ogre, but your evil stats kick ass and make for great arguments. I really thought Pujols would win it, largely because of that gold glove (and largely because Grum told me so), but Howard really did carry his team through the last month of the season. I saw a lot more of him than I did Pujols so that's going to weigh in my opinion, but there are more than his stats that should go into this. If it was all about numbers we could have a computer pick the MVP (and then we'd have the BCS). As far as making the post season, I don't think that should be a heavily weighted factor. Miguel Cabrera had a great year and most certainly should have been considered for MVP. He can't help it that his team sucks. You can't blame a guy for that. On the flip-side, was Beltran hurt because his team was so successful?

posted by SummersEve at 04:33 PM on November 20, 2006

Can't really argue with Howard winning. I would have voted for Pujols, but Howard had a great season. Was there honestly anyone more valuable to their team than Howard was to the Phillies this season? Good choice, and Pujols will be in the running every year anyways.

posted by dyams at 06:25 PM on November 20, 2006

Despite the fact that Howard led the Phils to a better record than the Cards. I'ts almost scary to think where his numbers would've ended up if he would have had a Rolen, instead of a Burrell or Dellucci, hitting behind him. Opposing mgrs were walking him before the game even started.

posted by Fungooli at 06:53 PM on November 20, 2006

Jeez. Have I really developed the reputation of being a killjoy and evil stats ogre? Shhhh, baby - don't listen to 'em. They don't appreciate you like the rest of us. Just keep that big brain happy. I have to agree with those that side with Pujols on this. Most of the major stats when weighed as a wholes, are pushes. But strikeouts and defence I thought would solidify Pujols for sure. Howard is a great hitter and class act, it definitely is a case of 1 and 1A, here, but there isn't another player in the game like Pujols. He's the best. Pretty much bar none.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 07:19 PM on November 20, 2006

Pujols did more in less games than Howard, I think that says it all right there. Add in the whifs (or lack thereof) and you have your MVP in Albert. Not that Howard was a bad selection. Now if Grum can just weigh in and check my answers I'll feel a lot better.

posted by HATER 187 at 10:54 PM on November 20, 2006

Two studlies doing it for real, no juice games, here. Oh,and stats? Barney Schultz, in Jim Bouton's book, "Ball Four", put it best..."tell your statistics to shut up..." /muffled sounds

posted by grum@work at 12:16 AM on November 21, 2006

First time ever I've heard Barney Schultz quoted as an authority . We all remember Barney as such a deep thinker.

posted by rchugh at 08:00 AM on November 21, 2006

Pujols' extended injury was in June, long before the Cardinals started their swoon to almost the worst collapse in baseball history. His 8-game homerless streak in September was a season-high, and in the middle of that drought his club was swept in a 4-game series by the 2nd place Astros. His team scored 17 runs in that series, and Pujols drove in 1 of them. It is hard to point at Pujols as the reason the Cardinals hung in there at the end. The Phillies had a better record and a much stronger September, even during Howard's season-ending homer drought. I believe that was the deciding factor in a close race. Man, these numbers are a lot heavier all of a sudden. Did somebody stop lifting?

posted by BullpenPro at 11:32 AM on November 21, 2006