Nov. 18 -- MVP THOUGHTS

BY SCOTT LAUBER

It has been three weeks since the Phillies won the World Series, and judging from the e-mails I have received and the conversations I've had, everyone is still as euphoric as they were when Brad Lidge hurled that last hellacious slider past Eric Hinske. I suspect the feeling won't subside any time soon, and it shouldn't. Around here, championships are like comets, appearing once every 25 years or so. But, when it comes to the NL MVP balloting, let's not allow the World Series afterglow to cloud our judgment.

Ryan Howard never deserved to win.

Once again, I didn't have an MVP ballot this season. If I did, though, I wouldn't have cast my first-place vote for Howard. I may even have strained to pick him better than third. It's nothing personal. I have covered Ryan for the past three seasons, and most of the time, I find him to be one of the more accessible, if not likeable, players in the clubhouse. And, once again this season, his majors-leading power numbers (48 home runs, 146 RBIs) were undeniable. Few players can affect greater change in a game with one mighty swing.

But the MVP should be awarded for season-long excellence, and Howard, quite frankly, had only six MVP-worthy weeks. Think back to May 7 when he was batting .163 with 50 strikeouts in only 123 at-bats. Howard was batting only .234 at the All-Star break, and for the new-age Moneyball folks who don't put stock in batting average, his overall on-base (.339) and slugging percentages (.543) were the lowest of his career. He struck out 199 times, equaling his total from 2007, and we all know about his defense. He led all first basemen with 19 errors, and in August, his confidence ebbed so low that he stopped trying to make the throw to second base, prompting Jimmy Rollins and Charlie Manuel to have separate discussions with him about it. Also in August, I had a conversation with Baseball Prospectus writer (and election projectionist) Nate Silver, who described Howard thusly: "I don't think anybody expected Ryan Howard to go from 'MVP' to 'average first baseman' overnight."

Howard's MVP candidacy took shape in mid-September. To be precise, it was Sept. 16 when, after a four-hit, three-RBI game against the Braves at Turner Field, we in the media began floating the MVP possibility. Over the season's final 31 games, while the Phillies were surging to a second straight NL East crown, Howard batted .354 (40-for-113) with 14 homers, 38 RBIs and a 1.273 OPS. Suddenly, he was being discussed as an MVP favorite, alongside Albert Pujols, Carlos Delgado, Ryan Braun and mid-season NL insurgent Manny Ramirez.

But Pujols was the best (and, really, the only) choice. This time, the writers got it right.

Pujols batted .357, second in the league behind Chipper Jones. He hit 37 homers, drove in 116 runs and led the NL with a 1.115 OPS, all with a torn ligament in his right elbow that required surgery last month. Yes, the Cardinals faded down the stretch, finishing fourth in the NL Central and four games off the wild-card pace. But, thanks in part to Pujols' mind-numbing consistency, they exceeded expectations for most of the season, staying in contention until September despite a slew of injuries to pitchers Chris Carpenter, Mark Mulder and Jason Isringhausen and slugger Chris Duncan, among others. They finished a respectable 86-76. Without Pujols, who knows?

Howard received 12 first-place votes, and although I don't agree, I'm not about to criticize the decisions of my colleagues in the Baseball Writers Association of America, including Rich Campbell of the Fredericksburg (Va.) Free Lance-Star, who left Howard off his ballot entirely for reasons that he has detailed here. Agree or disagree, most of the writers that I know spend weeks deliberating before casting their ballots. Those ballots were due on the final day of the regular season, and with Howard's torrid finish and the Phillies' NL East title fresh in everyone's mind, I can understand how he would garner support from the voters. I can also see how out-of-division voters who gauged Howard's season more according to his stats and less by their eyewitness account would've thrown their support toward Howard. But those of us who saw the Phillies every day, or even on a semi-regular basis, knew that Chase Utley's first 31 games (.369, 13 homers, 26 RBIs) may have been even more valuable than Howard's last 31, especially considering that Rollins was injured and Howard was scuffling in April and early May. Utley and certainly Lidge were equally valuable, if not more so, to the Phillies' success than Howard, an opinion expressed even by Ruben Amaro Jr. when I spoke to him Monday night.

"The voters probably view how players impact their team," Amaro said, "and we had several players on our team who were impactful. When you think of our team MVP, there were a lot of guys who could've probably shared the award."

That can't be said of the Cardinals. Their MVP, undoubtedly, was Pujols. The choice for league MVP, at least to me, was equally decisive.

OK, that's my opinion. What's yours?