Interesting that we have so many who say "no contest" yet it's 9-8 in voting right now.

 

Beauty-eye-beholder

They both played 22 years...

 

Bonds 762 HR, 1,996 RBI, 514 SB, 2,558 BB, .298 BA, 2,227 R, 2,935 H

 

Griffey 630 HR, 1,836 RBI, 184 SB, 1,312 BB, .284 BA, 1,662 R, 2,781 H

 

It's really not even close.

 

I agree, look what bonds did with all those walks, imagine his numbers if teams would have pitched to him.

Bonds is a 7 time MVP

 

Griffey Jr. is a 1 time MVP

 

These two numbers explain why I see it as a no-brainer.

Interesting that we have so many who say "no contest" yet it's 9-8 in voting right now.

 

Beauty-eye-beholder

Go ask in the college basketball forum if UK or Duke has the better college basketball program of all time and see what kind of response you get. Now go ask the same question in Montana.

Go ask in the college basketball forum if UK or Duke has the better college basketball program of all time and see what kind of response you get. Now go ask the same question in Montana.

 

 

I'm not sure I follow.

Bonds hit 317 HR's and had 4 MVP's at age 35 and older.

 

Griffey hit 147 HR's from 35 on...

 

It's not close for me... Griffey is the better player. If Griffey did the roids like Bonds he would likely be the All-Time leader. Griffey broke down because he didn't take care of his body, he was just that much better than everyone naturally.

I'm not sure I follow.

 

You are asking about a hometown guy. It is a biased sample you are drawing from given were Griffey is from. Just like Trump is (probably) not going to dominate the polls. Sure, beauty is in the eye on the beholder, I get that. But in this case I think it is more revealing the numbers are close, which leads me to believe the majority of folks side with Bonds.

You are asking about a hometown guy. It is a biased sample you are drawing from given were Griffey is from. Just like Trump is (probably) not going to dominate the polls. Sure' date=' beauty is in the eye on the beholder, I get that. But in this case I think it is more revealing the numbers are close, which leads me to believe the majority of folks side with Bonds.[/quote']

 

Gotcha.

Bonds hit 317 HR's and had 4 MVP's at age 35 and older.

 

Griffey hit 147 HR's from 35 on...

 

It's not close for me... Griffey is the better player. If Griffey did the roids like Bonds he would likely be the All-Time leader. Griffey broke down because he didn't take care of his body, he was just that much better than everyone naturally.

 

This is one reason I can't go all in on Griffey. Natural talent, sure, maybe Griffey is that guy. To be considered a GOAT - which Bonds sometimes in consideration for - longevity and upkeep or your body and skills are part of the whole package.

This is one reason I can't go all in on Griffey. Natural talent, sure, maybe Griffey is that guy. To be considered a GOAT - which Bonds sometimes in consideration for - longevity and upkeep or your body and skills are part of the whole package.

 

 

And the roids are the reason I can never go all in on Bonds.

Bonds was the better player, but Jr. had that Nike deal...

 

I'm glad I'll remember seeing both of them play.

This is one reason I can't go all in on Griffey. Natural talent, sure, maybe Griffey is that guy. To be considered a GOAT - which Bonds sometimes in consideration for - longevity and upkeep or your body and skills are part of the whole package.

 

I'm in the same boat as LRCW. Roids does it for me on Bonds. It's unfair. After turning 35, Bonds hit 170 more HR's than JR, 72 more than Aaron and 154 more than Mays.

 

If Pujols hits the same amount of HR's as Bonds from 36 on Pujols would have 834...

This is one reason I can't go all in on Griffey. Natural talent, sure, maybe Griffey is that guy. To be considered a GOAT - which Bonds sometimes in consideration for - longevity and upkeep or your body and skills are part of the whole package.

 

How he accomplished that goal is what many people have an issue with.

Jr.

How big is a Barry Bonds Bobble head. Does it look like him naturally.

They both played 22 years...

 

Bonds 762 HR, 1,996 RBI, 514 SB, 2,558 BB, .298 BA, 2,227 R, 2,935 H

 

Griffey 630 HR, 1,836 RBI, 184 SB, 1,312 BB, .284 BA, 1,662 R, 2,781 H

 

It's really not even close.

 

Griffey's career ending after 13 years. His last 7 don't count. Through 7 years, Griffey's stats are clearly better than Bonds.