Albert Pujols got gypped--Should have 7 MVP's

[Bully4you]

Lost out to Barry Bonds 3 times.
Lost out to Votto in 2010.
I think he should be retroactively given the three MVP's lost to Bonds.
The Votto loss is ridiculous too.
Votto playing in Cincinnati too easy to hit there.
Just a complete scam.
Pujols always had excellent seasons with Cardinals.
Tough ballpark to hit in.
Just a shame.

[makesnosense]

Lost out to Barry Bonds 3 times.
Lost out to Votto in 2010.
I think he should be retroactively given the three MVP's lost to Bonds.
The Votto loss is ridiculous too.
Votto playing in Cincinnati too easy to hit there.
Just a complete scam.
Pujols always had excellent seasons with Cardinals.
Tough ballpark to hit in.
Just a shame.

No.

[rbirules]

Should have? No.
Could have? Yes, there's some arguments to be made.

In Albert's first ten seasons (2001-2010) he finished thusly in the MVP voting:
2001 - 4th (behind Bonds, Sosa, Gonzales)
2002 - 2nd (behind Bonds)
2003 - 2nd (behind Bonds)
2004 - 3rd (behind Bonds and Beltre)
2005 - MVP
2006 - 2nd (behind Howard, beat him 8.5 vs. 5.2 bWAR, lead NL in bWAR)
2007 - 9th (lead NL in bWAR)
2008 - MVP
2009 - MVP
2010 - 2nd (behind Votto, lead NL position players in bWAR, Votto 0.1 ahead in fWAR)

Albert absolutely should have won the 2006 MVP, despite missing 19 games he still lead the NL in WAR. 2007 was his lowest finish in the first 10 years and he lead the league in bWAR (Wright lead it in fWAR, Albert was 2nd). His first three years only PED users finished ahead of him in the MVP voting, if only those writers voted the same way for MVP as they do for HOF.

He should have won 2006. 2007 and 2010 are toss ups. It's easy to get to four MVPs, not too much of a stretch to get to 5 or 6 if you think he wins both toss ups (without accounting for voter fatigue), but then you have to break out the mental gymnastics and retroactive moral high ground to give him any before 2005.

[sdaltons]

Lost out to Barry Bonds 3 times.
Lost out to Votto in 2010.
I think he should be retroactively given the three MVP's lost to Bonds.
The Votto loss is ridiculous too.
Votto playing in Cincinnati too easy to hit there.
Just a complete scam.
Pujols always had excellent seasons with Cardinals.
Tough ballpark to hit in.
Just a shame.

No.

[imadangman]

You didn't even mention 2006 which is his best case for a should-have-been-MVP. I'd put 2003 (batting title, led league in hits, extra-base hits, and total bases) as the 2nd best case followed by 2004, however Bonds did ultimately have better numbers both seasons.

[Red Bird Classic]

Lost out to Barry Bonds 3 times.
Lost out to Votto in 2010.
I think he should be retroactively given the three MVP's lost to Bonds.
The Votto loss is ridiculous too.
Votto playing in Cincinnati too easy to hit there.
Just a complete scam.
Pujols always had excellent seasons with Cardinals.
Tough ballpark to hit in.
Just a shame.

Don't care too much about who wins the MVP award, but Pujols was robbed because he repeatedly lost out to cheaters mainly Barry Bonds. But what are you gonna do?

Pujols is on the fast track to the HOF, Bonds may never get there. Don't know how Albert feels about it, but I'd rather have that.

[lidstrom5]

Ted Williams had two triple crown seasons and didn't win the MVP award so how do you think he felt?

[todd-parker]

Tough ballpark to hit in.

Opposing hitters don't seem to be having an issue with that lately.

[rbirules]

You didn't even mention 2006 which is his best case for a should-have-been-MVP. I'd put 2003 (batting title, led league in hits, extra-base hits, and total bases) as the 2nd best case followed by 2004, however Bonds did ultimately have better numbers both seasons.

Yeah, you either accept that Bonds put up the numbers he did, in which case he's a slam dunk MVP all of those seasons, or you don't in which case you should omit him from your ballot . . . as the writers only did a decade later when he was eligible for the HOF and they ignored the fact that they named him MVP four straight years.

[rockondlouie]

Lost out to Barry Bonds 3 times.
Lost out to Votto in 2010.
I think he should be retroactively given the three MVP's lost to Bonds.
The Votto loss is ridiculous too.
Votto playing in Cincinnati too easy to hit there.
Just a complete scam.
Pujols always had excellent seasons with Cardinals.
Tough ballpark to hit in.
Just a shame.

BAR-ROID did indeed steal MVP awards from Albert given the simple fact he CHEATED!

And NO WAY R. Howard should've ever got the 2006 award over Albert:

Albert
49 HR
137 RBI
.331 .431 .671 1.102
178 OPS+

Howard
58
149 RBI
.313 .425 .659 1.084
167 OPS+

[rbirules]

Lost out to Barry Bonds 3 times.
Lost out to Votto in 2010.
I think he should be retroactively given the three MVP's lost to Bonds.
The Votto loss is ridiculous too.
Votto playing in Cincinnati too easy to hit there.
Just a complete scam.
Pujols always had excellent seasons with Cardinals.
Tough ballpark to hit in.
Just a shame.

Don't care too much about who wins the MVP award, but Pujols was robbed because he repeatedly lost out to cheaters mainly Barry Bonds. But what are you gonna do?

Pujols is on the fast track to the HOF, Bonds may never get there. Don't know how Albert feels about it, but I'd rather have that.

That's an interesting question, and I think the majority of people would agree with you.

Would you rather be, statistically, one of the very best players of all time, have the two most famous records in the sport, and be a 7x MVP, but not be in the HOF because of a very well known scandal (for lack of a better phrase) OR; be a 3x MVP (who should have at least one if not two or three more, but oh well) who has 3,000 hits (top 10 in hits), passed every major HR milestone up to 700 (4th all time, including behind a known PED user), 5th in doubles, 2nd in total bases, 2nd in RBIs, 12th in runs scored, be a slam dunk 1st ballot HOF (maybe even a 100% vote getter) but maybe not in that many top 10 lists of all time?

[rockondlouie]

Ted Williams had two triple crown seasons and didn't win the MVP award so how do you think he felt?

J. Gordon (18 HR/103 RBI/.322 .409 .491 .900) in 1942 was a total JOKE over the Splended Splinter (36 HR/137 RBI/356 .499 .648 1.147) and his Triple Crown.

Joe D. (20 HR/97 RBI/.315 .391 .522 .913) stole the 1947 award from him (32 HR/114 RBI/.343 .499 .634 1.133) too.

[rockondlouie]

Lost out to Barry Bonds 3 times.
Lost out to Votto in 2010.
I think he should be retroactively given the three MVP's lost to Bonds.
The Votto loss is ridiculous too.
Votto playing in Cincinnati too easy to hit there.
Just a complete scam.
Pujols always had excellent seasons with Cardinals.
Tough ballpark to hit in.
Just a shame.

Don't care too much about who wins the MVP award, but Pujols was robbed because he repeatedly lost out to cheaters mainly Barry Bonds. But what are you gonna do?

Pujols is on the fast track to the HOF, Bonds may never get there. Don't know how Albert feels about it, but I'd rather have that.

That's an interesting question, and I think the majority of people would agree with you.

Would you rather be, statistically, one of the very best players of all time, have the two most famous records in the sport, and be a 7x MVP, but not be in the HOF because of a very well known scandal (for lack of a better phrase) OR; be a 3x MVP (who should have at least one if not two or three more, but oh well) who has 3,000 hits (top 10 in hits), passed every major HR milestone up to 700 (4th all time, including behind a known PED user), 5th in doubles, 2nd in total bases, 2nd in RBIs, 12th in runs scored, be a slam dunk 1st ballot HOF (maybe even a 100% vote getter) but maybe not in that many top 10 lists of all time?

Plus 2 World Series rings

I'd take Albert's clean career any day over Bar-roids.

(And the thing that always p izz ed my off about Barry is he would've been a slam dunk, 500-500 first ballot HofFer had he not cheated)

[Red Bird Classic]

You didn't even mention 2006 which is his best case for a should-have-been-MVP. I'd put 2003 (batting title, led league in hits, extra-base hits, and total bases) as the 2nd best case followed by 2004, however Bonds did ultimately have better numbers both seasons.

Yeah, you either accept that Bonds put up the numbers he did, in which case he's a slam dunk MVP all of those seasons, or you don't in which case you should omit him from your ballot . . . as the writers only did a decade later when he was eligible for the HOF and they ignored the fact that they named him MVP four straight years.

I hate to say it, but most baseball writers are shameless hypocrites.

During the great home run race, they cheered McGwire and Sosa even though the evidence was out in the open that both were cheating. Then they acted incensed when both essentially took the fifth before congress.

"I'm shocked! Shocked to find there's gambling going on in here!" - Captain Renault in Casablanca.

[Bully4you]

Lost out to Barry Bonds 3 times.
Lost out to Votto in 2010.
I think he should be retroactively given the three MVP's lost to Bonds.
The Votto loss is ridiculous too.
Votto playing in Cincinnati too easy to hit there.
Just a complete scam.
Pujols always had excellent seasons with Cardinals.
Tough ballpark to hit in.
Just a shame.

BAR-ROID did indeed steal MVP awards from Albert given the simple fact he CHEATED!

And NO WAY R. Howard should've ever got the 2006 award over Albert:

Albert
49 HR
137 RBI
.331 .431 .671 1.102
178 OPS+

Howard
58
149 RBI
.313 .425 .659 1.084
167 OPS+

Thank you.
Not many agree with me.
I didn't notice the Howard year.
Hell, he should have 8 then.

[Red Bird Classic]

Lost out to Barry Bonds 3 times.
Lost out to Votto in 2010.
I think he should be retroactively given the three MVP's lost to Bonds.
The Votto loss is ridiculous too.
Votto playing in Cincinnati too easy to hit there.
Just a complete scam.
Pujols always had excellent seasons with Cardinals.
Tough ballpark to hit in.
Just a shame.

Don't care too much about who wins the MVP award, but Pujols was robbed because he repeatedly lost out to cheaters mainly Barry Bonds. But what are you gonna do?

Pujols is on the fast track to the HOF, Bonds may never get there. Don't know how Albert feels about it, but I'd rather have that.

That's an interesting question, and I think the majority of people would agree with you.

Would you rather be, statistically, one of the very best players of all time, have the two most famous records in the sport, and be a 7x MVP, but not be in the HOF because of a very well known scandal (for lack of a better phrase) OR; be a 3x MVP (who should have at least one if not two or three more, but oh well) who has 3,000 hits (top 10 in hits), passed every major HR milestone up to 700 (4th all time, including behind a known PED user), 5th in doubles, 2nd in total bases, 2nd in RBIs, 12th in runs scored, be a slam dunk 1st ballot HOF (maybe even a 100% vote getter) but maybe not in that many top 10 lists of all time?

It's a easy choice for me because the last thing I'd want is to have CHEATER engraved over my record whatever that record is. It taints everything you've ever done or will do.

A reputation is a fragile thing. Once you've lost people's respect, it's extremely hard to get it back.