My son asked me this question, but if you think about its fascinating. Ruth retired in 1935 so he obviously passed someone from his era or before, but if you look at the top 100 career home run leaders there very few who played during and before Ruth, and their #'s are so small compared to Ruth. (eg.Jimmie Foxx at 14th with 534 home runs, but he still played for 10 years after Ruth retired). This means that when Ruth retired with 714 home runs the next closest player would have been way, way, way behind him. Is this true? I guess the simple question is when Ruth retired in 1935, who was in second place for career home runs and how many did he have?
I guess it may not be surprising that Ruth was so far ahead of everyone else as 1935 was still the early years of baseball and many of the great hitters we think of today came after 1935.
2007-07-23
07:36:42
·
6 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Sports
➔ Baseball