Pujols leads the majors in a slew of categories, from slugging average and OPS to more advanced stats like Value Over Replacement Player and Runs Created. He's one of the best baserunners and defenders in the league at his position. There is no good statistical argument that could possibly favor any other player in the league as more valuable this season.
Yet again and again, we read another tortured argument for a vastly inferior player as NL MVP. The arguments against Pujols, and in favor of lesser candidates, get more ridiculous by the day. Here's a recent sampling of some beauties from various baseball columnists:
If Pujols doesn't win the MVP award this year, it'll be the second time in the past three years that he deserved to win, but didn't. In 2006, Pujols led Howard in every category (in most cases by a wide margin) except homers and RBI and also led his team to an NL Central crown and an eventual World Series crown (while Howard's Phillies missed the playoffs). Yet Howard edged out Pujols for the award. If Barry Bonds wasn't putting up numbers that no one in the sport's history had seen before, Pujols would have several more trophies to add to his 2005 award.