2006-08-12 02:44:27 · 24 answers · asked by da man 2 in Sports ➔ Baseball
babe ruth all the way
2006-08-12 02:49:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The "experts" are not going to give a concise answer because Ruth and Aaron come from different generations.
Hank played more games per season than Ruth did, giving him a lot more at bats than the Babe ever had. Also Aaron's generation was a lot more health conscious. Ruth lived life to its fullest, and you can see it taking its toll in any photo of the Babe towards the end of his career.
It's the same problem with records being broken today, which is why there is a lot of asterisks in the records book.
But people do tend to go for "the clasics", so I would have to say Hank Aaron, only because I have no first hand memories of Babe Ruth.
2006-08-12 03:45:41 · answer #2 · answered by leehoustonjr@prodigy.net 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If I were putting together a team and had to make a choice between the two, I'd go with the Babe. Why? Remember, he wasn't only an outfielder and slugger, but he started out his career as a pitcher as well which makes him a more well-rounded player than Aaron. Plus, people would come to watch the Babe - Aaron never packed them into the seats like Ruth did until he was close to breaking Ruth's HR record.
2006-08-12 07:38:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Right now I'd say Hank Aaron (Babe Ruth is dead!!)
In their prime Babe Ruth no contest,
Hank Aaron was a very good player who played for a long time. good consistant numbers (If I remember he never hit 50 homers in a season) he did have over 3000 hits but,
Babe Ruth revolutionized the way the game was played, he destroyed the home run record (by about 400 to 500 home runs for a career and had the top 3 or 4 seasons for hitting home runs by the time he retired). He didn't reach 3000 hits but he made his mark for eternity in the history of the game
2006-08-12 02:50:27 · answer #4 · answered by David T 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Babe Ruth by far. Aaron had 4,000 more at bats than Ruth. Ruth spent the first years of his baseball career as a pitcher. Ruth playd in the dead ball era. Ruth was really the first slugger in baseball history.
Not taking anything away from Hank Aaron. He had a marvelous career, though I would take Willie Mays before Aaron frankly.
2006-08-12 16:58:06 · answer #5 · answered by TG Special 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think Babe Ruth would care if you claimed him to be better because he is dead. It doesn't matter if you commemorate him because he can't hear you. Just give Aaron credit for being the home run king even if Barry does beat him some day. Aaron and Ruth did it the honest way.
2006-08-13 10:48:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Babe Ruth was the best. However, he is dead now and Hank is still alive, so I think Aaron would beat him today.
2006-08-14 12:15:04 · answer #7 · answered by danceman528 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Babe Ruth is the 1 and only.
2006-08-13 07:26:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd have to say Hank Aaron.
Hank Arron had one of the most consistent bats in his time. He hit 40 homeruns in almost every season he played.
2006-08-13 05:51:06 · answer #9 · answered by Jeffrey S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both of them played during eras when the pitchers were in the ascendent. Ruth in the formidable "dead ball" era. Aaron was mr. Consistency, I think every year he had 20-30 homers.
I will take Josh Gibson, the true Homerun king. He never player in the Majors but in the ***** leagues where he hit something like 900 homeruns.
But if I had to choose, give me Ruth for his sheer power, 60 homeruns one year.
2006-08-12 02:53:32 · answer #10 · answered by Robert B 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hank Aaron for sure, the Babe is dead dude.
2006-08-12 02:47:01 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋