Who was better in their Prime: Bonds or Sosa?

Question

both in their prime dominated baseball from 1998-2004 but i wanna know who was the better player? im asking cause i didnt watch baseball back then. from that stretch sosa hit 367 HR while bonds hit 329 and sosa had a lot more RBI but bonds had a lot less strikeouts and a lot more walks. it seems like bonds career has been very long and consistent averaging like 40 HR a year with few strikeouts and lots of walks while sosa had that great stretch of like 7 years where he hit 60+ HRs three times and got the majority of his homeruns in his career and bonds has only hit over 50+ HRs once compared to sosas four 50+ HR season three of which were 60+. so who was/ is the better player ?

Answer 1

Bonds was the better player.

Bonds was a consistent hitter during his prime. Sosa was kind of streaky. Bonds was also a pretty good defender and Sosa was just average. Bonds probably had more speed than Sosa. I think Bonds got a lot more walks than Sosa during that time period because the pitchers knew that Bonds was a good hitter and that if they a mistake, he will hit it. I think the pitchers also knew that Bonds was a smart hitter and Bonds knew what to take and what to swing at. Sosa probably had less walks because the pitchers knew his tendencies and what type of hitter he was.

Answer 2

The stat you forgot to include was stolen bases. Bonds was a threat on the basepaths. Sosa would steal the occasional base, but was not inclined to go as much. They both are about equal in the outfield, but Bonds has a more accurate arm. Factor in the Gold Gloves and MVPs, and you see Bonds is the better player.

Answer 3

Bonds was look at the gold gloves, the mvps, his homeruns, etc.... Bonds was the most featured slugger during that time. Look how many walks Bonds had because of his abilities where's Sosa's who was a free swinger. Struck out way too much. Bonds was the best in his prime.

Answer 4

Wow...I can't believe how many people here love Sammy...

The answer is Bonds BY A LOT!!!

Before they BOTH juiced, Bonds was the better player, a sure Hall of Famer before he ever juiced-up (look up the numbers)...Sammy struggled for years, juiced and put up like 6 absurd years...they're both jerks for doing the roids, but if they hadn't Bonds would still have hit 600 homers...

Bonds is the better hitter for average, better runner and defender...a true 5-tool player when he was younger...

It's not even close, Barry Bonds, as much as I hate him, was an amazing player before I lost all respect for him, and you can't really compare Sosa's career to his...just count the MVP trophies..

Answer 5

Bonds: He was-and some say still is-one of the elite and most patient. Pitchers fear him more than Slamming Sammy, they walk him, if they don't, he can homer. He can take first pitches deep, he can take any pitch deep if it's close to the strike-zone. He has had a more graceful fall, and though I am 50-50 on whether he's taking steroids now (90-10 for past), he as greatly improved this year, and is more consistent that A-Rod. Sosa is currently a badge for a team, a dessert for pitchers that don't slip. Bonds wins both categories, now more than then.

Answer 6

Bonds swung a big stick, Sosa was a better defensive player

Answer 7

Sosa was better because he was much more of a team player. It was a big deal every time Bonds hit the ball the other way or hustled.

Answer 8

Sosa because Bonds uses steroids

Answer 9

Bonds: he was a HOF player before he juiced up.
Struck out less. Hit for better average. Better OBP.

Both only servicable on D but at least Bonds threw out a runner every now and then.

Answer 10

They would be about the same, because they both used steroids. But excluding that. I would say Sammy Sosa