Bonds voted to All Star team

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't know that I'd agree that there would be no doubt that Ruth is the superior player. The superior hitter, maybe. But he couldn't run the bases or play the field nearly on Bonds' level. Also, I would say that a better way to put it is that there is no question who the most dominant player of their era was. I doubt that there's ever been a player in any sport that's been more dominant over his peers than Ruth was over his.

Let me give you some reasons why Ruth is unquestionably the greatest player of all time. Not only did he have the single greatest hitting season(1921) he also had the greatest all around season(1919)
In 1919 Ruth hit .322 with 29 HR's 114 Rbi's had an OBP of .456 and a slg% of .657 He led the league in HR's, Total bases, runs, slg % and OBP%. Good numbers right but not astronomical. Well considering that he only played in the field for 116 games leading the league in the HR, runs, and RBI catagories is amazing. And also considering that same year he won 13 games as a pitcher with an era of 2.22 makes this the greatest all around year in baseball history.

Ruth's record as a Pitcher is 94-46 with a lifetime ERA of 2.28 in only 4 years as a pitcher. His era for his short stint as a pitcher was more than a half a run a game better than the league average, which is a greater feat than it would be today because pitchers regularly went 9 or more innings as opposed to todays pitchers who only need to go 6 to considered effective.

Bonds may be a marginally better fielder ( he has been brutal the last 4 or 5 years and by all accounts Ruth was pretty good in the field until his 30's) and is unquestionably better in the running game. But Ruth was hall of fame quality as a pitcher as well as a position player. Bonds may have Ruth as a standard and he matches up reasonably well, but for Ruth there was and still is no standard which he can be measured by except himself.