Should Albert Pujols have won the MVP award last year?

Answer 1

This is the way I looked at the MVP award is that it goes to the ball player who contributed most to the success of his team during the season. Would have the Cardinals won the World Series without Albert Pujols Where would have the Cardinals finished without Albert Pujols Where would have the Phillies finished without Ryan Howard? So I believe both were deserving of the award but without Howard the Phillies are in sorry shape so I can see the writers giving it to Howard but in the whole scheme of things my vote would have been for Pujols who is the better overall player on a consistent basis.

Answer 2

Absolutely not. Ryan Howard was much more dominating and he was just in his second season on the professional level. In reality the Phillies won more games than the Cardinals but they just caught the luck of being in the NL Central. Ryan Howard CARRIED his team on his back during the second half of the season hitting over .330 with 30 HR's and 80 RBI's (something along those lines) AFTER the All-Star break while Pujols was a big reason that the Cards almost had a colossal breakdown and only beat out the Stros by 1 game despite being up by a good 8 with 3 weeks left in the season. You cant bring in the playoffs into the equation b/c the MVP is voted on BEFORE the playoffs. Plus Pujols hit just .200 in the most important series of his career (World Series) and it was David Eckstein, the young pitching staff, Carpenter, and the role players who carried that team to a WS not Pujols. Ryan Howard and Chase Utley were the only 2 players on that Phillies team that kept them in the hunt right up until the last day, they didnt have a dominant starter like Carpenter, they HAD to hit well for this team to win and they did that and almost got them through. Pujols has the luxury of playing with some tough underrated players and alos has the luxury of playing knowing his pitching staff could dominate on any given night while Ryan Howard never knew what he was gonna get from their pitching staff.

Answer 3

If you ask me, MVP stands for "most valuable player" period!! It doesn't stand for "most valuable player who happens to be on a team that makes the playoffs".

Yes, Pujols had a big say in the Cardinals success that ultimately won them the world series. However if the 06 Cardinals had Howard instead of Pujols, what's to say that Howard wouldn't have had the same impact on St. Louis when he put up BETTER NUMBERS as a Phillie than Pujols did as a Cardinal?

I don't think Pujols deserved to be MVP in 06. Ryan Howard had a better overall season than Pujols.

Answer 4

i do in comparison to Pujols a lot because of the fact he hasn't respected my Mets too frequently, yet he deserved the MVP. Berkman had some help around the line-up, on an identical time as Pujols had near to none the place he replaced into located in the line-up. it rather is why he gained it.

Answer 5

I think that it is a possibility because the Cardinals made the World Series. Ryan Howard had a monster season but only for a mediocore team. Still though he had a monster year.

Answer 6

It's history. Get over it! Isn't it enough that an 83-78 team won the series. It just shows how screwed up the playoff system is.

Answer 7

No. As a Mets fan it kills me to say this, but Howard was defenitely the MVP last year.

Answer 8

I don't follow baseball simply because my team never gets near the playoffs let alone the championship so that a player could get MVP

Answer 9

It was close. Albert could've gotten it just as easily.

Answer 10

NO Ryan Howard -------------- Ryan had Pat Burrell hitting behind him and still won the HR race!!

Image if he had Scott Rolen behind him ( 70 HR)