Ruth and Bonds Home Run Ratios
by
Asher B. Chancey,
BaseballEvolution.com
May 9, 2006
Here is another interesting way to compare Bonds and Ruth as homerun hitters.
As we all know, Bonds and Ruth both have excellent homerun to atbat ratios (HR/AB). But just how good are they? The only way to really tell how good an HR/AB ratio is requires comparing it to the league the player played in. If a player hit a homerun once every four atbats, we would all agree that this was amazing. But if half the league also hit one every four at-bats, we would probably think this feat slightly less amazing.
What I did was this - I took Bonds and Ruth's HR/AB for each season of their career, and then compared to the HR/AB for the league's best homerun hitter. If Bonds or Ruth was the best that year, I just used the second place finisher's numbers. Then, I set up a ratio of ratios - Bonds or Ruth's HR/AB divided by the HR/AB of the league leader. A ratio over 1.00 means that Bonds or Ruth had a HR/AB higher than the next league leader that year, with 2.00 meaning twice the league leader, 1.50 meaning one and a half times the league leader, etc. Below 1.00 means less than the league leader, with .50 meaning half the league leader, and so on.
And . . .
Barry Bonds
| Year | Homers | At-bats | HR/AB | Other HR | Other AB | Other HR/AB | Ratio |
| 1986 | 16 | 413 | 0.039 | 37 | 552 | 0.067 | 0.58 |
| 1987 | 25 | 551 | 0.045 | 49 | 621 | 0.079 | 0.58 |
| 1988 | 24 | 538 | 0.045 | 39 | 543 | 0.072 | 0.62 |
| 1989 | 19 | 580 | 0.033 | 47 | 543 | 0.087 | 0.38 |
| 1990 | 33 | 519 | 0.064 | 40 | 615 | 0.065 | 0.98 |
| 1991 | 25 | 510 | 0.049 | 38 | 564 | 0.067 | 0.73 |
| 1992 | 34 | 473 | 0.072 | 35 | 531 | 0.066 | 1.09 |
| 1993 | 46 | 539 | 0.085 | 40 | 585 | 0.068 | 1.25 |
| 1994 | 37 | 391 | 0.095 | 43 | 445 | 0.097 | 0.98 |
| 1995 | 33 | 506 | 0.065 | 40 | 579 | 0.069 | 0.94 |
| 1996 | 42 | 517 | 0.081 | 47 | 626 | 0.075 | 1.08 |
| 1997 | 40 | 532 | 0.075 | 49 | 568 | 0.086 | 0.87 |
| 1998 | 37 | 552 | 0.067 | 70 | 509 | 0.138 | 0.49 |
| 1999 | 34 | 355 | 0.096 | 65 | 521 | 0.125 | 0.77 |
| 2000 | 49 | 480 | 0.102 | 50 | 604 | 0.083 | 1.23 |
| 2001 | 73 | 476 | 0.153 | 64 | 577 | 0.111 | 1.38 |
| 2002 | 46 | 403 | 0.114 | 49 | 556 | 0.088 | 1.30 |
| 2003 | 45 | 390 | 0.115 | 47 | 578 | 0.081 | 1.42 |
| 2004 | 45 | 373 | 0.121 | 48 | 598 | 0.080 | 1.50 |
| 2005 | 5 | 42 | 0.119 | 51 | 586 | 0.087 | 1.37 |
| Total | 708 | 9140 | 0.077 | 948 | 11301 | 0.084 | 0.92 |
Babe Ruth
| Year | Homers | At-bats | HR/AB | Other HR | Other AB | Other HR/AB | Ratio |
| 1914 | 0 | 10 | 0.000 | 9 | 570 | 0.016 | 0.00 |
| 1915 | 4 | 92 | 0.043 | 7 | 384 | 0.018 | 2.39 |
| 1916 | 3 | 136 | 0.022 | 12 | 545 | 0.022 | 1.00 |
| 1917 | 2 | 123 | 0.016 | 9 | 587 | 0.015 | 1.06 |
| 1918 | 11 | 317 | 0.035 | 11 | 414 | 0.027 | 1.31 |
| 1919 | 29 | 432 | 0.067 | 10 | 567 | 0.018 | 3.81 |
| 1920 | 54 | 458 | 0.118 | 19 | 631 | 0.030 | 3.92 |
| 1921 | 59 | 540 | 0.109 | 24 | 598 | 0.040 | 2.72 |
| 1922 | 35 | 406 | 0.086 | 39 | 585 | 0.067 | 1.29 |
| 1923 | 41 | 522 | 0.079 | 29 | 555 | 0.052 | 1.50 |
| 1924 | 46 | 529 | 0.087 | 27 | 562 | 0.048 | 1.81 |
| 1925 | 25 | 359 | 0.070 | 33 | 624 | 0.053 | 1.32 |
| 1926 | 47 | 495 | 0.095 | 19 | 583 | 0.033 | 2.91 |
| 1927 | 60 | 540 | 0.111 | 47 | 584 | 0.080 | 1.38 |
| 1928 | 54 | 536 | 0.101 | 27 | 562 | 0.048 | 2.10 |
| 1929 | 46 | 499 | 0.092 | 35 | 553 | 0.063 | 1.46 |
| 1930 | 49 | 518 | 0.095 | 41 | 581 | 0.071 | 1.34 |
| 1931 | 46 | 534 | 0.086 | 46 | 619 | 0.074 | 1.16 |
| 1932 | 41 | 457 | 0.090 | 58 | 585 | 0.099 | 0.90 |
| 1933 | 34 | 459 | 0.074 | 48 | 573 | 0.084 | 0.88 |
| 1934 | 22 | 365 | 0.060 | 49 | 572 | 0.086 | 0.70 |
| 1935 | 6 | 72 | 0.083 | 36 | 535 | 0.067 | 1.24 |
| Total | 714 | 8399 | 0.085 | 635 | 12369 | 0.051 | 1.66 |
I don't think I need to explain the results - they are pretty self-explanatory.
Disagree with something? Got something to add? Wanna bring up something totally new? Asher resides in Alexandria, VA, and can be reached at asher@baseballevolution.com.
