When he hit 60 home runs in 1927, he hit more home runs than any of the other (7) American League TEAMS.
When Bonds hit 73 homers in 2001, every team in the National League out-homered him.
Of course they did, it's simply not human for one player to out-homer an entire league .
Statistics Through 6/22/07( Projected HR'S Per Aaron's At Bats) Name-Homers-- At Bats- HR per AB- Slugging Ave-- HRs Projected Aaron--755-- 12364--6.
555- 755 Bonds- 749- 9,683-- 7.
608- 909 Ruth-- 714-- -8398-- 8.
690-1051 Mays- 660- 10,881-- 6.
557--750 Looking at those numbers, anyone can see that Barry Bonds is great, but Babe Ruth was better.
The Babe won 12 Home Run titles to Barry's two.
He won six RBI crowns to Bond's one.
Ruth also led his league in Total Bases seven times, while Bonds achieved that feat only once.
Ruth's lifetime batting average was .
342 vs Barry's .
Also weight training and "flaxseed oil" have helped out at the plate.
According to baseball-reference.
com, there were 1.
12 homers per game in 2001-three times more than in 1927.
( Notice I didn't even mention steroids ) Of course Barry was much superior in the speed department.
He stole over 500 bases in his career while Ruth stole just 123.
Barry is also the superior outfielder.
It was fun to watch him play left field and cut off those hits.
Barry won eight Gold Gloves during his career and many of us consider him to be the top defensive left fielder of all time.
One of the reasons Ruth had less at bats was that he pitched from 1915 through 1919.
He was the best left-handed pitcher in the American League during that period with a record of 89-46 and posting an ERA of 2.
He also was an incredible postseason pitcher.
In three world series, Ruth pitched 31 innings with a record of 3-0 and an ERA of 0.
In summary, I think we all agree that Bonds is a great player.
But when you think of Baseball and Homer Runs, you think of Babe Ruth.
Bonds could hit 8000 home runs and that wouldn't change.