Ruth will always be recognized as the greatest of his era, and one who rebuilt baseball after the Black Sox scandal.
Comparing statistics from one era to another is tricky, and really doesn't conclude anything. There are a few players that seem to exemplify great baseball players, Ruth was certainly one; in St Louis, we have Stan "The Man" Musial, who remains a fan favorite. I can hardly imagine Bonds generating the same reverence in San Francisco that Musial has here. Nor is any baseball commissioner likely to descibe Bonds as "baseball's perfect warrior", as Ford Frick described The Man.
And so the Red Sox have Ted Williams; the Pirates have Clemente; and the Dodgers' Sandy Koufax. Winners all. And San Francisco will always have Montana.
I agree. People saying he should be thrown out of baseball or somehow prevented from breaking Ruth's record miss a very important point: it doesn't matter, because Balco Barry Bonds' name is mud, the records are tainted, the history set in stone.
Ruth was Baseball... He was to Baseball what Jordan was to Basketball... they are timeless.
Ruth, didn't just hit home runs, he owned the game, pitching, batting, fielding.. he was so far above everyone else of his time or any other time across the board.
Bonds may not like to have to hear Ruth's name, because he's a narcicistic arse, but he will NEVER be to baseball what Ruth was. No matter how many balls he hits, he'll never be player enough to shine Ruth's shoes, let alone get out of his shadow.
ba-doom-CHING!!!