2006-06-06 11:47:49 · 28 answers · asked by kaz_life77 1 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Ruth because all he did was girls and hotdogs
2006-06-06 11:48:46 · answer #1 · answered by hockeynut2227 2 · 10⤊ 4⤋
Let's be real here.
Bonds- no titles. 3 mvp's pre roids. Never had the ability to make any team a super contender. He was too easy to pitch around. Jeff Kent? Yeah- that was a threat.
Ruth - Hands down. .340 career batting average. Even if I just write that he wins. Forget about the titles and the home runs and the RBI's Always remember he got a ton of those RBI's with Gehrig on the team and Gehrig had close to 2000 for his career.
Bonds hit big 2 run homers when his team was down or up by 5 runs.
2006-06-06 19:16:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry, Barry. Here's why the Babe is better:
1. He was a wonderful pitcher. Really, this should end any debate. Not only was Ruth a top pitcher, but to this day he owns the 12th-highest winning percentage (.671) and the 15th-lowest ERA (2.28) among pitchers with at least 100 career decisions.
2. He regularly out-homered entire teams. In 1920, when Ruth hit 54 homers (a record at the time), he out-homered 14 of the other 15 teams in baseball. As late as 1927, when he broke his own record with 60, he out-homered every other AL team.
3. He has the highest OPS (on-base percentage plus slugging percentage) in history. These days, OPS is viewed as the ultimate measure of an offensive player, and no one tops Ruth's career mark of 1.164. Bonds? He's fourth at 1.052.
4. He did it in fewer at-bats. Ruth hit his 714 homers in 8,398 at-bats, for a rate of one homer every 11.76 at-bats. Bonds has needed 9,246 at-bats (through Thursday) to collect his 714, a rate of one every 12.95 at-bats.
5. He was never accused of using steroids.
2006-06-06 18:52:31 · answer #3 · answered by steve 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Baby Ruth.
2006-06-06 20:26:29 · answer #4 · answered by indianalee 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ruth, if bonds retired right now I would put this in the record books
Henry Aaron 755 hrs
Barry Bonds 715 hrs***
Babe Ruth 714 hrs
***This player cheated and took steroids and I (Bud Selig was to much of a dumbass to investigate)
2006-06-06 20:08:08 · answer #5 · answered by Markymark 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ruth no questions asked. This answer is not because Bonds took steriods. Ruth is just all around better.
2006-06-06 19:05:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ruth. He had natural power (aka didn't use steriods), and he helped his team to win. How many World Series titles has Bonds won? Zero! Ruth could hit for average too, his .342 lifetime average is miles above Bonds who is currently hovering between .299 and .300. Ruth was loved, he was a national icon, he had candy bars and cereal named after him. Bonds is a cheater a lying life-long loser, who did steriods out of jealousy. In my opinion Bonds isn't even one of the top ten players of all time.
2006-06-06 18:53:05 · answer #7 · answered by embarko3 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Barry Bonds and Babe ruth are close becuz bonds is the number one walked guy ever in the MLb. Bonds couldve beaten Hank along time ago if he wasnt feared so much. Ruth wasnt feared by pitchers as much as barry or hank. Barry bonds is much better and has done it in only 9000 at bats(2000 at bats wasted of walks or HBP)
2006-06-07 18:00:12 · answer #8 · answered by Tj 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you are talking in the sense of pure slugging or homeruns, its Ruth. Ruth did it in fewer at bats and contrary to some posts on this question he also did it over fences FARTHER away. The fences nowadays are CLOSER not FARTHER than back in Ruth's day.
"The way a team plays as a whole determines its success. You may have the greatest bunch of individual stars in the world, but if they don't play together, the club won't be worth a dime."
--Babe Ruth
Barry could never be as eloquent..............
2006-06-07 02:46:50 · answer #9 · answered by hawaiiansouljah 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Agree that it's impossible to compare the two because we live in a MUCH different time (and circumstances) than we did 75 years ago.
Could Babe Ruth do as well today as he did back then? You can't even begin to guess at an answer to that.
And if you're going to bring up steroids, better start looking at Albert Pujols...
2006-06-06 19:10:51 · answer #10 · answered by wndsng 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
first off steriods stay in your body for at least a year, barry has taking a test every 6 months, never positive, so all of you leave him alone, ruth didnt face other races, 95 mph fastballs or sliders and knuckle balls, sinkers or even change ups, barry can pull a 101 mph fastball into the cove while ruth had to only hit it about 280 to right, so you know who is better- Barry Lamar Bonds
2006-06-07 13:24:58 · answer #11 · answered by Derek 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋