[BlackRazor]

If he misses 20% of his team's games, he can't possibly be the league's most valuable player.

Even if it could be proven (to your own satisfaction) that that particular player created more runs than any other player in the league -- despite missing those games?

If your answer would still be yes, then what would you suggest as the arbitrary criteria for minimum % of games played to be eligible for the MVP?

[Alberta's Child]

If the player was head and shoulders above everyone else, I could see how he'd be the MVP despite missing so many games. In this case, I don't think Bonds was such a clear-cut winner over Pujols.