the best guy won.

Hooray for Mr .256 BA_RISP, he of the collossal collapse when his team needed him the most.

(But hey, he hit a lot of home runs).

you must watch lots of phillies games.

I guess the voters are 32 joe morgans?

"What's a VORP? Ryan had more runs batted in! He's obviously the best."

OBP - Pujols
SLG - Pujols
Defense - Pujols
Baserunning - Pujols
Clutch - Pujols

And i'm a Cub fan.

Umm...Pujols deserved it more...but let's be fair here: Howard's SLG was higher. :)

No, Pujol's SLG was higher. Not even that close - .671 to .659.

Remember, besides having more doubles and a higher batting average, Pujols also missed 2 weeks of the season.

Oh crap, my bad...looked at the wrong line. Heh. Stupid...

Howard came to the plate with runners on base 72 times more than Pujols. Howard's BA with runners in scoring position: .256. Pujols': .397, leading the league.

Howard had a great and surprising year; Pujols had a slightly greater year but one that is eerily similar to his last few seasons. Howard is a fresh young face who led a team almost into the playoffs after it dumped most of its stars. Pujols puts up nearly the same (amazing) statistical season every year is surly to sports writers. Sports writers don't like him. Sports writers vote. And you have your winner.

Let's face it, Howard won because he is a fresh face. i know Pujols is a terrific player, sure fire HOF'er; but when you put up terrific numbers year in and out, it seems a lilttle stale at times. i know this sounds ridiculous, but does anyone see my point of view ?

Baseball writers have once again confirmed they have absolutely no clue what they're doing. If you put Pujols in Citizens Bank he'd hit 95 home runs. And Beltran in 4th is a fucking joke.

wow Josh, get out of my head !

"Let's face it, Howard won because he is a fresh face. i know Pujols is a terrific player, sure fire HOF'er; but when you put up terrific numbers year in and out, it seems a lilttle stale at times. i know this sounds ridiculous, but does anyone see my point of view ?"

What is the point in having the award if you're not going to give it to the Most Valuable Player? This it needs to be someone new stuff is almost as dumb as the people that think that MVP doesn't mean best player in the league.

hey, let's face it...beltran was good not great...think about it...nym had ~ 3 other all-star players in their lineup...that's not carlos's fault but berkman had NOBODY...think about that!!! lance is better the voters knew the 'stros were a revolving door lineup around lance...this was certainly not true of beltran...

MVP is subjective. That's the problem. The award isn't "Statistically Best All-Around player, Taking Into Account Both Offensive and Defensive Statistics." And it isn't "Most Valuable Player In Terms of Winshares." If it was, sabermetricians would be handing it out and there'd be little to no controversy.

Instead, it's MOST VALUABLE (to their team) Player; a phrase designed to be entirely subjective. The advent of win shares has made it possible to pick a winner based on cold, hard, numbers...but winshares and VORP are not accepted by most of the baseball community, and definately not the writers. Hell, look how long it took for people to recognize the importance of OBP...we're AT LEAST one generation away from anything deeper then OPS playing a role in their decision making.

Anyway MVP voting seems to include defense only when a DH is involved; defense worked against Ortiz in 2005, but did nothing for Pujols in 2006. And occasionally, the more media-friendly player will beat out the statistically superior one; in this case, Howard, who did have a pretty damn good year himself, won because he approached 60 homers without the Steroid Cloud hanging over his head, and had overall numbers that, while not Pujolsian...again, were pretty solid.

And for the record, I thought Pujols deserved it.

What probably cost Pujols was his somewhat surly demeanor to reporters - same thing that cost McGwire vs. Sosa. If the numbers are close, and they were, then that seems to be a tie breaker. (Bonds overcame this by putting up numbers that weren't close to anyone else).

The thing with Berkman vs. Beltran, is that while Beltran is more valuable (since he plays CF), Berkman is probably the better overall hitter. And Berkman was the only really great player on his team (at least offensively), while Beltran had Wright and Reyes who were close to his level.

Congrats to the voters for getting the right guys in the top 5. They just got the order wrong.

Pujols is on track to eclipse Ted Williams' mark of Most Seasons Deserving of an MVP Without Getting an MVP Award. Not to say he should have beaten Bonds in years past; just that he had MVP-worthy numbers those years too.

"Instead, it's MOST VALUABLE (to their team) Player; a phrase designed to be entirely subjective."

It's not subjective. The player who is the most valuable is the player that contributes the most to his team on the field. We can measure these contributions.

Adam- So did you just stop reading what I said there, or what?

SleepyCA:
"Hooray for Mr .256 BA_RISP, he of the collossal collapse when his team needed him the most.

"(But hey, he hit a lot of home runs)."

What on earth are you talking about?

Pujols had a better season overall, even considering offense alone. Figure in defense and Pujols' edge grows.

But Howard had simply ludicrous numbers after the All-Star break, nearly single-handedly pulling a team that was 40-47 going into the break to a 85-77 final record (better than the Cardinals, FWIW). His numbers during that time were better than what Pujols has posted in any single half-season in his entire career.

Oh yeah, Howard single handedly carried to the Phillies in the second half.

It's not like like Rollins had an OPS of .886 in the 2nd half, or Utley of .909, or Burrell of .898, or the Phillies as a team had a OPS of .831 (compared to that of .777 of their opponents). It was just all Howard, huh?

By contrast, the only one that hit well besides Pujols for the Cardinals in the 2nd half was Chris Duncan (who platooned), and in limited duty Spezio, and Edmonds, when his concussion syndrome wore off.

Note my use of the word "nearly." Even at that, it was intentional hyperbole. But the point stands. Howard's OPS was over .350 higher than any other regular on the Phillies after the All-Star break. I think it's fair to say that his contribution dwarfed that of other players on the Phillies.

Look, I already said once that Pujols was the superior player. I guess I didn't say it explicitly, but I also would have chosen him for MVP if I'd had a vote.

My previous post was mostly intended to refute the ridiculous notion that Howard had a "collossal collapse when his team needed him the most."

The MVP is more than just numbers, and although both Pujols and Howard had great seasons, I think a few non-statistical factors worked in Howard's favor:

The Cardinals staggered into the post-season, almost blowing a huge lead in their division. The Phillies came back from out of the race and almost got in.

Whether it's fair or not, Howard's interaction with the media was much better than Pujols'.

But in my view, depending on your definition of "League" MVP, what Howard did beyond the numbers made the difference. He re-energized a team that was staggered after losing or trading several of their top stars. More importantly, he rejuvenated a fan base and the city of Philadelphia to once again embrace baseball. That is one tall order in that town. Albert Pujols might be the best player in baseball today, and certainly a deserving MVP candidate, but he did not have to carry that load.

And for being able to do that, Howard certainly earned the title of the league's most valuable player this season in my opinion.

Pujols is certainly at least one full win better than Howard defensively, and probably two. Pujols is one of the best, if not the best, defensive first baseman in MLB. Howard is one of the worst, and possibly saved from being the single worst by New York's fevered imaginings of Giambi as a position player.

And then you casually slide in the fact that Pujols is a win or more better than Howard with the bat as well.

The writers embarrass themselves again, just like 2005's AL Cy Young. Talk about familiarity breeding contempt; all Pujols did was have one of the best offensive seasons of all time.... again. But Howard is young and photogenic and not yet old enough and rich enough to tell the writers that he doesn't need them and they do need him. Disgusting.

re: ryan howard is the NL MVP

for approximately two years, i've been beating the drum for Ryan Howard.

Today, I get to say, that if this had been a stock I'd invested in, it would have paid off 1000 to 1.

Ryan Howard isn't just an MVP--he's a class act, a decent guy, a nice guy and a personable guy.

I've watched him play against Pujols any number of times-- Pujols hits regular homers to the stands.

Howard hits moon shots that threaten to leave the ball park. People's jaws drop when they hear the crack of the bat and see how far he hit it.

Also, during all of September, no one would pitch to Howard, ala Barry Bonds. No one ever accorded Pujols that kind of respect.

Howard had one of the greatest seasons in baseball history last year.

the press properly recognized it by awarding him the MVP.

while there are sabrmetric arguments for the slight superiority of Beltran or Pujols, you can't get around the magical nature of the 58 home run mark, which Howard reached in the town where Jimmie Foxx hit 58 homers in 1932-- a mark that had stood for almost 75 years--and tying Hank Greenberg's mark from the 1930s--and nearly reaching Maris and Ruth--and doing it without steroids.

What Howard was rewarded for, more than anything, was bringing a fresh NON-STEROID face to the game. He hit his home runs the old fashioned way--with muscle, power and timing--and not with a shot of happy juice from jose conseco.

The underlying problem of baseball right now is that all of the existing offensive data since 1988 are tainted by the Conseco book and related revelations.

Howard came along and showed that a player, playing clean in the post-steroids era, with strict testing in place, could still hit 58 homers and come close to threatening ruth and maris, and hit those homers 500 and 600 feet, and win the home run contest, and do it cleanly.

And he likes kids like the babe.

Howard is humble, respectful of baseball history, and gives credit to his teammates. he doesn't do anything to attract attention to himself.

one also gets the distinct impression he really enjoys playing baseball.

This is the first MVP awarded to a Phillie since Mike Schmidt in 1987. Now we always respected Mike Schmidt greatly for his many MVPs and accomplishments--but lets face facts. Schmidt was an introspective, moody fellow who often was rude and diffident to the philly fans and media.

that's why we loved Lenny Dykstra and the 93' phillies, who embraced us.

Howard is more in that mold--he is respectful of the fans and nice to the fans.

It's also clear from his second half performance that he and Utley are the new team leaders.

Is he the MVP? Well, based on his second half performance, yes, He accumulated 20 of his 30 win shares after the all-star break, so really he had a 40 win share season after the all-star break. I distinctly remember him being at around 8 win shares as late as may or early june 2006.

Extrapolating from that, Howard actually had a 40 win share season from the all-star break on.

No one else was on that kind of pace for the year.

The fact is he closed with monster numbers.

Let us not forget his 41 rbi in august which tied a NL record which had stood for nearly 50 years since frank howard in the early 60s.

Ryan Howard is a worthy winner.

Everyone who has posted here who thinks the writers made a mistake, I am open to having a one hour debate on the merits of Ryan Howard vs. any other national league player in 2006, debate to be held somewhere in Philadelphia, and open to the media.

--art kyriazis, philly

"He re-energized a team that was staggered after losing or trading several of their top stars. More importantly, he rejuvenated a fan base and the city of Philadelphia to once again embrace baseball."

That's nice and all, but at the end of day Pujols contributed more to his team on the field over the course of the season. Period. End of story. MVP.