10 reasons why Pujols tops Howard for MVP

[Luvofthegame]

By Dan O'Neill
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
09/14/2006

There is momentum building in the press, especially the Eastern side of it, for Ryan Howard's Most Valuable Player candidacy. That's good for the St. Louis kid, who is having a fabulous season and deserves that consideration.

Arguments can be made in both camps, and these last few days of the season could speak volumes. You could write volumes on the debate. But, constricted by space, not counting Wednesday's result, here are the top 10 reasons why Albert Pujols should be the MVP.

10. According to the Society for American Baseball Research -- which is, to my knowledge, not a terrorist organization -- 18 of Pujols' home runs had accounted for the game winning runs batted in. That is the highest single-season total since Willie Mays had 19 in 1962. By comparison, nine of Howard's league-leading 56 homers were of that quality.

9. Howard had a major league leading 138 RBIs, but Pujols had a major league leading 23 game-winning RBIs.

8. Games in April and May, especially for this Cardinals team, count just as much as games in August and September. Howard has been the force in keeping the Phillpots afloat in the second half, no question. But when none of his teammates were hitting squat, Pujols had 25 homers and 65 RBIs to put the Cardinals 15 games over .500 and five games in first place before June arrived. They will be in the postseason because of it.

7. Howard had struck out 156 times. Pujols had struck out 43 times, or 113 times less.

6. Pujols missed 17 games with a strain in his right side in June; otherwise, his homer and RBI numbers would be up with Howard's.

5. Pujols was batting .389 with runners in scoring position, Howard was at .248.

4. Jim Edmonds has been a nonfactor most of the season. Scott Rolen has batted .250 with five homers and 25 RBIs since the All-Star break.

3. Table-setter David Eckstein has not played in almost a month.

2. Pujols is a plus on defense. Howard is a reality show.

1. According to a television commercial, Pujols has come extremely close to hitting Deion Sanders in the head with a baseball. To my knowledge, Howard has not met Deion Sanders. :lmao:

[Baseball Guru]

lol @ #1:laff:

9. Howard had a major league leading 138 RBIs, but Pujols had a major league leading 23 game-winning RBIs.

8. Games in April and May, especially for this Cardinals team, count just as much as games in August and September. Howard has been the force in keeping the Phillpots afloat in the second half, no question. But when none of his teammates were hitting squat, Pujols had 25 homers and 65 RBIs to put the Cardinals 15 games over .500 and five games in first place before June arrived. They will be in the postseason because of it.

I didnt even think GWRBI's was a stat anymore... Brad, do you have any idea where I can find that stat? I was curious at looking at the leaders...

As for #8, unfortunately the voters don't remember games in April and May as much as they do in August and Sept... If the Phillies make the playoffs Howard will win the MVP IMO... Hell, even if they just miss out he may still win it...

[Durango53]

7. Howard had struck out 156 times. Pujols had struck out 43 times, or 113 times less.

This is the stat that just keeps popping out to me!!!!!
For any player to strike out only 43 times these days is something of note. Add to the fact he can hit for power is unheard of in todays game. It is almost today a thing people brag about if they strike out over 100 + times.

[Luvofthegame]

James....I have been looking for that stat too, Bernie M was talking about it on ESPN 1380 the other day but never mentioned where to get that info. I know I have seen Pujols myself win several games, but like you, I would like to verify that info.

[Luvofthegame]

James....Obviously..we both already know this is a stat that has been "discontinued"...The reasosning in whole is I guess sound, but I am not sure that overall RBI's tell the whole story,(the theory is that the guy with the most RBI's is going to have the most GWRBI's) not sure that's always true...but it is what it is!

This is an old Column, but it's point's are still relevant I think.




The NL MVP Selection and Game Winning RBIs.
by Brian Popkin
September 28, 2004

NL MVP Selection

In this column I’ll run through the choices for the NL MVP and give my pick. But first I’ll talk more about GWRBI or the stat that they don’t want you to see.

When I grew up in the 80's, GWRBI was a very popular statistic. It even had its own baseball card for the leaders. One card with the AL leaders and one for the NL leaders. It may have been my New York bias, but I liked how it gave Mattingly an extra card to collect. He was the AL’s GWRBI leader in ‘85 and ‘86. He also finished 1st and 2nd in the AL MVP those years. (He would’ve finished first twice if not for Clemens in 86. The AL writers went crazy in the 80's giving 3 MVPs to 3 pitchers.) I think this is more than a coincidence. There is a strong correlation between MVPs and GWRBI leaders. It is much stronger than for something like batting average. Look at Boggs and Gwynn and count all the batting titles won between them = 13. Now count all the MVP trophies they own = 0. A high average doesn’t impress the MVP voters much.

GWRBI’s are really a sub-stat of RBI’s, which is where the real correlation lies to MVP. This was especially true in the 80's. From ‘80-83 the NL MVP led the league in RBI’s. In the AL from ‘80-88 not counting the 3 pitchers, half the MVPs were RBI leaders. This lessened from the 90's to the present. Only 7 of the 30 MVPs were RBI leaders. One reason is the Colorado effect. In the last nine years, Colorado had 5 RBI leaders and none were MVP’s. That trend should continue this year when Castillo wins the RBI title. RBI’s are greatly discounted if they come from Colorado. The other reason is the Bonds effect. Bonds walks so much, he has only won one RBI title in ‘93 to go with all his MVP awards.

My point is that you can’t talk about MVPs without looking at their GWRBI numbers. Ignoring the numbers doesn’t make them go away.

The knock on GWRBI’s is that Bill James doesn’t like them. He doesn’t believe in clutch hitting and he doesn’t want anyone looking at any stats used to measure clutch hitting. Critics would also point to a 24-0 game where the leadoff hitter hits a homerun in the 1st inning and say he doesn’t deserve the GWRBI. This is taking an extreme example and using it to make a broad generalization against a stat. They would also say the guy with an RBI in the first inning of an 11-1 game is undeserving. They couldn’t be more wrong. Look at the 9/19/4 game between the Yankees and Red Sox. Sheffield hit a 2 run shot in the first off Pedro and that was the game. Once he hit it Pedro got rattled, and the game was over. His two runs were all the Yankees needed. He sure deserves that GWRBI and credit for the Yankees winning the division.

If you want to talk about undeserving stats, you should look at hockey. They have a plus/minus (+/-) statistic. It goes to everyone on the team that scores. For example, if Gretzky (my use of Gretzky shows how little hockey I know... he’s the only player I can name for a hypothetical) steals the puck and scores, every one of his teammates on the ice gets a plus one. Even the teammates that did nothing get credit, talk about undeserving. At least the guy with the GWRBI actually drives in a run to earn it.

Critics would point out another clutch hitting statistic called Batting Average with Runners In Scoring Position. They’d say this RISP stat eliminates the need for GWRBI. Only this RISP stat is just as flawed as GWRBI.

For example, the Yankees are down by 2 runs in the bottom of the ninth with 2 outs. Jeter singles to bring up Sheffield. This is a clutch situation, but not a RISP one. Jeter is on first, not second. If they need second base he could easily steal it, and the opponents might not even contest it, but they don’t need it. It is pointless to put a runner at second at that point, the only run that matter is Sheffield who hits a homerun to tie the game. Now he didn’t get a GWRBI for this HR, but that is because both stats are flawed. It doesn’t mean we need to get rid of both stats. It just means we should add a new one for Game Tying RBIs.