Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bigbangtheory" data-source="post: 2934288" data-attributes="member: 563177">Ah, you are talking different ERA&#039;s. Thats what I dont get about how people can even compare! A lot goes into it. How the pitchers were back then to now and how longer the fields used to be back then to now and more people throw fastballs then junk compared to back in the day.Hank Aaron is the champ and rightfully so. He could hit home runs and hit for average, plus he had 3771 hits. So he had a lot more to his game than just hitting homeruns. He was also up there with Bonds in walks, but more games.Babe Ruth had amazing numbers as well, but didnt blossum for years. If he started off with a bang, he would BE the all time greatest ever!Barry Bonds as much as I hate the POS, has had an amazing career. I still wont consider him the champ because of the type of team player he is. He is out for one person and one person only.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bigbangtheory, post: 2934288, member: 563177"] Ah, you are talking different ERA's. Thats what I dont get about how people can even compare! A lot goes into it. How the pitchers were back then to now and how longer the fields used to be back then to now and more people throw fastballs then junk compared to back in the day. Hank Aaron is the champ and rightfully so. He could hit home runs and hit for average, plus he had 3771 hits. So he had a lot more to his game than just hitting homeruns. He was also up there with Bonds in walks, but more games. Babe Ruth had amazing numbers as well, but didnt blossum for years. If he started off with a bang, he would BE the all time greatest ever! Barry Bonds as much as I hate the POS, has had an amazing career. I still wont consider him the champ because of the type of team player he is. He is out for one person and one person only. [/QUOTE]

Verification