Who was the better player in the 90's, Griffey Jr or Barry Bonds?

Answer 1

People love to bash him but Barry still put up better numbers in the 90's than Griffey did, Griffey just got more pub for his plays in the 90's on ESPN, when they open with what Griffey did on Sportscenter every night you think he must have been the caped crusader, while Barry was just putting numbers up without all the publicity, remember he was never a media guy so they did not cover him as well as people who were media guys.

Answer 2

Of the two, Griffey, although I can think of much better players in the 90's than Griffey. I also can't stand Griffey or Bonds. Honestly, Griffey is a jerk since he helped the Mariners beat the Yankees in the 1995 A.L.D.S. and on top of it, he said that he would never play for the Yankees. Fine, the Yankees have never needed Griffey anyway.

Answer 3

Bonds was never loved by the sportswriters -- and Ken Griffey, Jr. was a baby-faced, all-smiles and cap-backwards cutsy/media darling from Day 1. Therefor, even though they were thought of in the same breath/sentence as #1/#2 from the 90's as the best, etc...

Griffey was named to the ALL CENTURY TEAM at the Boston All-Star game, and Bonds wasn't. It was the BIGGEST CRIME perpetrated by MLB (itself) on an individual player, in the history of the Game (short of Curt Flood). I was embarassed the way the sportswriters were GIDDY about LAUGHING at Barry Bonds, that year and due to this... and SINCE. This affects perception, from then.. and ALL the way to now.. as the steroids allegations/talk/press was amplified because of the cumulative affect of 100s of (white) writers simply taking aim at Barry Bonds. And of course, Bonds being nobody's idea of an Einstein-relation.. fed enough more, every time he tried to answer his critics (or, ignored them). He couldn't win -- and that's evident NOW by the way fans view him. He's the BEST MLB ballplayer in your lifetime, period.. and you still think for a 10-year period that there was another one, better?

Count the WALKS that Barry Bonds had -- and compare that with the next-two batters in the 90's or whenever you wish, after that... that's is FEAR across the minds of MLB pitchers and MLB opposing managers.. and that says it ALL.

Your answer is -- BONDS.

And I'm a Yankee fan. (real one, not a Giuliani-type fan)

Answer 4

Griffey was probably the best player of the 1990's. He could do everything on the field before he got injured. He was a great hitter who could hit for average and power. He could also steal bases. Bonds could do all of these things also but did not put up the kind of numbers that Griffey did in the 1990's. He started putting up numbers in the late 1990's and in the beginning of the 21st centrury. If they were both in the prime of their career I would take Griffey.

Answer 5

Griffey Jr., Bonds wasn't as good of a hitter as he was in the early 2000 years

Answer 6

Barry Bonds.

Answer 7

Griffey. If he would have stayed healthy (ie HGH that Bonds used to rehab) he would have had the same stats as Bonds. He is younger too so he may end up in the 600 club or even higher depending on what his goals are after baseball.

Answer 8

Count MVP Awards. (There are many other supporting metrics, but this one is quickest.)

It was Bonds.

There are too many haters in fandom to not have this shouted down, not to mention the numerous Griffey groupies. But it was Bonds. Not that Junior wasn't great, he was, but Barry was better.

Answer 9

ummmmm GRIFFEY until bonds took steroids and even after that Griffey was still better.

Look at the stats on this site

Answer 10

There's no question that Bonds was the better player. His 3 MVP's in the 90's says that alone.