Exit Poll: Has Ryan Howard hit his way to MVP?
SOUTH GRAND — With his hulk having whiffed his way through Game 1 of the World Series, Philadelphia Phillies manager Charlie Manuel dared the media, the fans at home and maybe even the Tampa Bay Rays to doubt the power of Ryan Howard.
“Take him for granted,” Manuel said. “Start throwing to him. See what happens,”
What has happened in the past three games of the World Series is Howard, the local boy done good, has found his swing. It started with a couple singles, a double here, and — liftoff! — two home runs and five RBIs in Game 4, as detailed by Hall of Famer Rick Hummel in this morning’s paper. He has three homers in his past two games of the World Series, and he’s hoisted the Phillies to within one game of the franchise’s second World Series championship, the city’s first in 100 pro-sports seasons. After striking out three times with runners in scoring position in Game 1, Howard has broken loose of the choke hold on his power just in time.
The Rays won’t be intentionally walking Chase Utley to face Howard for a second time this series.
But has Howard flexed enough to also seize the lead in the World Series MVP derby?
That’s the subject of the poll below. There are other contenders, of course. Tonight’s starter Cole Hamels, and his sinister changeup, certainly could pitch his way to a 2-0 record and a great bid for the award. Reliever Ryan Madson, and his celebrated changeup, has made his case by consistently K’ing the heart of Tampa Bay’s order. Some others are scattered in there, ready for your vote below.
According to MLB.com, the chants of “MVP! MVP!” returned to Philadelphia on Sunday night, bathing Howard in the warmth and din of their prediction (demand?). Howard stands as the most likely rival to St. Louis Cardinals first baseman Albert Pujols’ claim to the MVP — Aramis Ramirez (huh?) taking home the Hank Aaron Award, notwithstanding — as he led the majors in both home runs and RBIs, power stats that can be blinding when confronted with an MVP ballot.
It’s possible, though, that the same scenario is brewing in 2008 that happened in 2006. Only in reverse. That year, Pujols got “The Ring” and Howard got the MVP. This fall, vice the versa. Pujols could do with the 86-win Cardinals what Howard did two years ago for the 85-win Phillies — not get them to the playoffs, but take the MVP for trying.
Maybe Howard has another MVP award he’ll bring home to St. Louis …
Loading …***
Footnote 1: As part of the same press conference mentioned above, Manuel asserted that part of what makes Howard “valuable” is how he performs in the loosely defined area of “clutch”. Said Manuel:
“Check his batting averages and his run production from the seventh inning on or later in the game and see what you come up with,” Manuel said. “He will stay on my team, probably, as long as I manage it. I like him that much.”
Let’s look at the “Close and Late” statistic used by STATS LLC. What is a hitter’s batting average in the seventh inning or later in a one-run or tied game? Pujols .314 in those “Close and Late” situations. Howard batted .139 from the seventh inning on, and .158 in “Close and Late” at-bats.
***
Footnote 2: It is always worth mentioning at this time of year that the voting for the National League MVP award is concluded before the first pitch of the playoffs is thrown. Those ballots are due immediately after the conclusion of the regular season. Any playoff performance is not considered for the voting of awards like the Cy Young, the Rookie of the Year and the MVP.
-30-
Derrick Goold said he was going to Mizzou for capital-J journalism, but after growing up in the Time Zone Baseball Forgot he was really drawn to MU sitting between two major-league cities. Goold joined the Post-Dispatch in 2001 after working for The Times-Picayune and Rocky Mountain News, covering sports from LSU to NHL and every level of baseball in between. 
Howard had a good game in the midst of a Phillies scoring downpour, yet the night before he whiffed with the game on the line in the 8th. Spare us this garbage that he’s the MVP of anything: one good game (or month) does not an MVP make.
I felt the same bogus criteria applied when the Cards won it two years ago. Eckstein had a great game and a half at the end, but Rolen was easily the best player in that World Series.
If Howard gets the NL MVP over Pujols again this year, it’s a complete joke. Worse than Andre (last place) Dawson taking home the honors over Ozzie (first place, pennant winning) Smith back in 1987.
There is definitely a case to be made for Scott Rolen as 2006 World Series MVP. But should the Phillies win tonight the World Series offers a great petri dish for an experiment — are votes based on what was done most recently (read: Game 4, September) or is the series/season taken into the decision. Do you go with a brilliant snapshot? Or the compelling slide show?
If Hamels smoothly wins game 5, gets the record, and clinches the series, I think he gets the award, but if it is a high-scoring affair and Howard comes up big, he will likely receive it.
I lean toward Hamels at this point– but if Tampa Bay extends the series then it’s “yet to be determined” I don’t dislike Howard– but you have to factor in a couple of muffed plays….
A lot of the argument against AP for MVP is based on Pujols’s comments in ‘06, when he argued that the MVP should come from a playoff team. Thoughts, DG?
I voted “yet to be determined” because there was no way to vote for Jimmy Rollins. It seems to me that every time he leads off an inning he reaches second base before the first out. He also makes all the plays in the field. Howard is a good player but I don’t think he is as valuable as Rollins.
Hamels is the sole reason this series stands at 3-1 right now. Taking the Series back to Philly with an 0-2 deficit and all those wasted RISP would have made for a much less festive atmosphere at Citizen’s Bank Park heading into the weekend—and a gut check for the patience level of fans starved for a world championship in a major sport. But I also voted “Yet To Be Determined” contingent on Hamels’ performance tonight and a new hero that might emerge for either team as the Series wraps up. As of this moment however, the Philadelphia weather conditions may play a bigger role in how this Series shapes up than any one player does.
Regarding Pujols and the MVP, emc2013 brings up an interesting point but one that any of the more weak-kneed baseball writers are going to have to leave in the 2006 media archives. With all of the pure hitting, OBP, walks-to-strikeouts, baserunning, and defensive discrepancies between El Hombre and RH so blaringly obvious—a writer should ask himself one simple question: Would ANY supporting cast, in any year in baseball history, have been a better team with the 2008 version of Ryan Howard in their lineup at first base…or the 2008 version of Albert Pujols in their lineup at first base?
I apologize in advance because there is no way to ask this without coming across as sarcastic, but please explain to me how a pitcher can be the sole reason for a 3-1 series lead when he didn’t appear in three of those four games … This is a legit request.
I don’t see how anyone can argue that the criteria for a ”playoff” MVP at any of the levels - should be based solely on the players performance during that particular series - and how his play significantly impacted the outcome of the SERIES!!
This is how someone that goes 1-4 with 1 RBI in each game of a 7 game series can win an award *rightfully so* if each of those RBIs significantly impacted the outcome of the SERIES!
This is how guys like the following - Win WS MVPs though not always their team’s LEADERS:
Mike Lowell - 2007 WS MVP
David Eckstein - 2006 WS MVP
Jermaine Dye - 2005 WS MVP
Josh Beckett - 2003 WS MVP (I feel Brad Penny should have been co-MVP)
Troy Glaus - 2002 WS MVP
RJ and Curt Schilling - 2001 WS MVP
You won’t see a single pitcher winning 3 games in a series except once in a blue moon now. Johnson did it in 2001 - but Game 7 Schilling started and Johnson got his 3rd win in relief.
Jack Morris pitched BRILLIANTLY in 3 games (winning two of them in 1991) with a ND.
I don’t see a pitcher starting 1 or 2 games in a 7 game series and impacting the SERIES like before. A closer??? Yes …
Dang, I got got called on that one as soon as I posted it! I wouldn’t have been offended by sarcasm—I realized how asinine it was stated with no recourse to edit. “Sole reason” was not a good choice of words. Could I get away with “primary reason”? I just felt like these two teams were evenly enough matched that the pitching matchup between Hamels and Kazmir in Game One after the longer layoff by Philly favored the team who was opening on their home field. Hamels stopped the Rays cold in their tracks and if he doesn’t throw a 7-inning, 2-run masterpiece with all of the Phillies’ failed offensive opportunites in Game One…the Rays win that game like they beat Boston in Game Seven of the ALCS. So Hamels’ performance rose above any other in importance in those first 4 games IMHO, a momentum-swing thing.
Am I off the hook, DG? I was far more passionate about the Pujols thing anyway. But I’d better let you do the opinion-writing, this foot in my mouth doesn’t taste great….