Just wondering about this. One was Rich Campbell of the Fredericksburg Freelance-Star, who left Howard off altogether. The other was Mark Zuckerman of the Washington Times. He had Howard as tenth. They both cover the Nationals.
Did either of these guys post any explanations? If so, please put up a link.
By the way, the answer to this is not "cuz howard sux."
Mr.B
Favorite Answer
No excuse for that. The writers were correct in awarding the MVP to Pujols, but Howard still deserved to be top 5 on any ballot. Sounds like petulant writers with a grudge to me.
Anonymous
YES!! I saw one guy voted Howard tenth and I thought that was very odd. That guy should not be allowed to vote ever again. 2nd or 3rd I can see, but tenth is obviously because of some personal issue.
Anonymous
I'm not sure about the explanations, but Albert had a great .BA, drove it over a hundred runs, hit over 35 HRS, while Howard plays in a very small park, and had a batting average barely over .250.
Anonymous
Howard wasn't listed on all of the ballots, but maybe they just felt like voting for someone else like in the nfl mvp voting where favre got 1.
srilatha A
They're just pissed that the Nationals suck.
When was the last time a player had 40 homers and 130 RBi's and didn't come in the top five?