Despite my preference for another NL Central ballclub, I've always held a great deal of admiration and respect for one Jose Alberto Pujols of the Cardinals.

Admittedly, a lot of it has to do with the St. Louis slugger being the cornerstone of my keeper league team since 2001. I also used to work out at the same Kansas City gym that he did during the offseason and his workout regimen was astounding to watch (especially when compared to my let's-creep-everyone-out-with-the-amount-of-sweat-I-produce-in-the-first-two-minutes routine on the treadmill.)

Yet even if it weren't for either tie, it'd be impossible not to respect Pujols and the numbers he puts up year-in and year-out. With a line of .357/.462/.653, 37 HRs and 116 RBI, he clearly was the best choice for National League MVP this season and it's good to see that the BBWAA agreed by giving Pujols the award for the second time in his career. This year's incomplete Cardinals had no business winning 86 games, yet they did and Pujols was by far the biggest reason why.  

Most of the writers agreed, but perhaps predictably, there were two voices of gross dissent when it came to the voting. Even though I'm not one to constantly whine about the choices of every BBWAA voter, the vote cast by Tom Haudricourt of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel defies all logic and reason and deserves to chuckled at. 

Here's Haudricourt's ballot, via Chuckie Hacks:

1. Ryan Howard, Phil
2. CC Sabathia, Mil
3. Manny Ramirez, LA
4. Carlos Delgado, NY
5. Aramis Ramirez, Chi
6. Prince Fielder, Mil
7. Albert Pujols, Stl
8. Ryan Ludwick, Stl
9. Ryan Braun, Mil
10. David Wright, NY

What's worse is that it seems Haudricourt knows what a dumb decision it was to be the only only voter to place Pujols lower than fourth because he offers a "Oh, how we wish FJM was still alive" reasoning on his blog:

I like to weight my voting to teams in the playoff hunt because I think that puts more pressure on players and separates the men from the boys. There's little pressure on players having big years if their teams aren't playing for anything at the end.

With the Cardinals finishing fourth, I voted Pujols seventh on my ballot. I don't consider MVP to be "the most outstanding player" award and therefore don't just go by who had the best stats. I like to credit players for lifting their teams to the post-season or at least keeping them in the race until the very end.

I understand that the Cardinals would not have been even close to the wild-card berth without Pujols, but I still like players who elevate their game in crunch time and lift their teams to new heights. And I thought Ryan Ludwick had just as much to do with keeping the Cards in the hunt as Pujols did. St. Louis did stay in the wild card race until mid-September, but mainly because the Brewers and Mets were gagging at the time.

Look, I don't begrudge anyone their voting choices, nor am I unwilling to listen to those who want to make cases for Ryan Howard or Carlos Delgado or whoever. But placing Pujols behind two guys who didn't even play a full season in the NL (plus Ramirez's squad had two less wins than the Cards) and a completely undeserving Prince Fielder? You're just asking to have your baseball acumen questioned.

Then again, maybe Haudricourt was onto something here. As the more memory-minded among us can recall, Pujols was quoted in 2006 as saying "Someone who doesn’t take his team to the playoffs doesn’t deserve to win the MVP" when he finished second to Ryan Howard in the NL MVP voting.

Yeah, so the guy who won the MVP on a non-playoff team is on record as saying a non-playoff player should never be honored with that award. If I'm Haudricourt and I'm about to face an avalanche of criticism for my selection, I'm making sure that Albert's asinine agreement is tacked onto my original argument.

(Talk about finding an ace up your sleeve you had no idea was there in the first place.)