I'm saying that Hank's greatness goes beyond his records. If in 15 years somebody else hits 756, they probably won't be greater than Hank. Hank's contribution to the game is so much more than 755 that somebody passing him doesn't diminish it. Like I said, I do not consider Babe Ruth any less great because Aaron passed him. I consider Mays to be a better ball player than Aaron, even though Aaron has a lot of career numbers on him. Statistics only go so far. If Bonds passes Aaron then people will know what is going on. I don't think it will change much in the final analysis. I'm not saying all records are worthless, I'm just saying they aren't the be all and end all of it. I don't think it really matters that much if Hank Aaron is the all time HR king. It's the fact that he passed Ruth and did it the way he did it. He was the hallmark of consistency and longevity. He did everything the right way and was one of the best to ever do it. The numbers don't tell you that. Numbers get hyped to the degree they do because it's something to talk about. But when it comes to comparing all time greats across different eras they don't mean as much. Jim Brown, Walter Payton and Barry Sanders don't have Emmitt's career rushing numbers but to most people they're all better backs. Numbers give you a reference point, but "real baseball fans" don't live and die by them.