I dislike the Red Sox first and foremost.

I didn't know titles were a qualification of being a Hall of famer. Before the steroid era, at the time of his election, Yaz's stats were pretty damn impressive. Add in his gold gloves, and you have a pretty complete player. I would imagine his 18 All-Star selections during his playing days, were a good sign of his place in the game.

Love this line.

He said we would eventually get it

The most compelling criticism I have seen of Yaz is that his numbers were in large part due to park effects and that he really wasn't all that good on the road. I think Tabe if I am remembering correctly made a pretty strong case for that.

His splits were not that bad on the road. If that's the case, let's start penalizing players career stats today, b/c they play in the launching pad stadiums of today. Plus, home versus away didn't affect his gold gloves. I'm not saying that he is a top tier Hall of Famer. I am just saying that at the time of his election, how could he be denied.

Carl Yastrzemski
Home/Away---BA----Slg.--onbase------HR------D------T------RBI----AB-----BB
Home:------.306---.503----.405------237----382-----38---1,063---5,948---959
Away:------.264----.422----.360-------215----264-----21------781---6,040---886

Park or not, Yaz was a fine player. He had a great game and had to in order to play for 24 years. If one is going to hold a player accountable to the " park effect " then the same has to apply to Ruth, Gehrig, Koufax ( pitchers park ), ect. Either you have mad talent to be among the greats or you don't, and the talent will translate to any park.

Babe Ruth
Home/Away--BA----Slg.--onbase---HR-----D-----T-----RBI------AB-----BB
Home:-----.347---.699---.482-----347---239---70------979---4,033---1,037
Away:-----.338----.681---.466-----367---267---66---1,004---4,388---1,019

Lou Gehrig
Home/Away--BA----Slg.----onbase---HR---D-------T-----RBI------AB------BB
Home:-----.329---.620-----.436----251---206-----83-----947-----3,861----713
Away:-----.351---.644----.458----242---329-----79---1,043-----4,140---795

Is someone really trying to argue that Carl Yastrzemski doesn't belong in the hall of fame? If you're worried about park effects, look at OPS+, which normalizes for those. Yaz has a 130 OPS+ in about 14,000 PA. He's tied with Roberto Clemente, Mike Epstein, Greg Luzinski, Minnie Minoso, Hal Trosky, Dave Winfield, and Ross Youngs. And of course has more PA than any of them (he's second all-time).

He wound up with a (barely) positive dWAR, despite the fact that he played corner outfield and 1B, positions which start with a penalty in dWAR. By comparison, Winfield was at -23 dWAR and Clemente was at 12. Both in corner outfield spots. So what we've got is someone who was much better than Winfield as a fielder, and quite a bit worse than Clemente (which sounds about right). He was their equal as a batter, and had a much longer career than either. That's way way way over the line for the hall of fame.

(Just for fun, Luzinski was at -21 dWAR in a career much shorter than Winfield's.)

What does this prove, that Yaz wasn't a Hall of Famer at the time of his election? Not every Hall of Famer is going to have Ruthian stats. You have certain players who are of course superior to others, but that doesn't mean that they are not worthy on a certain level. Don't forget to add in his GG's, unless you don't want to count defensive awards. Then again, there are people who argue that Nolan Ryan isn't Hall of Fame worthy b/c of his winning %age and lack of Cy Youngs, so nothing surprises me in these conversations.

No he is clearly a HOFer, it would be insane to argue otherwise, just perhaps not quite as good as his popularity/mythology suggests.

I really don't think that he is all that popular/mythical outside of the Boston area, although when it comes to key rookies in 60's baseball cards, he is in the top ten, arguably top 5(only Rose and Ryan clearly ahead). I think that's the driving force behind this card, more than just Yaz himself.

I don't follow, if he is a key rookie it is because of his popularity, no?

This would be a great thread topic.

I probably did not do a good job of conveying my opinion clearly pertaining Yaz. Of course he should be a HOFer. But I do put him in the category of other players like Brooks Robinson and Phil Niekro. All three of these guys deserve to be in, but there are question marks pertaining each one of them. As Peter posted previously, Yaz only hit .260 on the road for his career. The real point I was trying to make on the original post of the thread, is it's baffling as to why his rookie card commands the price it does in extremely high grade. The mystique of playing in Boston and Fenway for almost a quarter of a century has to play a huge part in it.

Yaz
 

Yaz stats were inflated in Fenway for a couple of reasons. Obviously, the park is great for left-handed hitters AND managers in those days were reluctant to pitch left-handers in Fenway (which is not very smart, but whatever) which meant Yaz faced a majority of right-handed pitching. His splits were vastly superior against right-handed pitching and he faced them 75% of the time. Compare that to someone like Reggie Jackson who faced right-handers only 65% of the time.

AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB AVG OBP SLG
vs RHP 8973 1459 2684 537 38 374 1413 1499 .299 .398 .492
vs LHP 3015 357 735 109 21 78 431 346 .244 .321 .371

You have to weigh the Fenway Park stats with the fact the era he played in favoured pitchers and reach a conclusion.

Obviously, enough voters ignored the Fenway Park factor and felt he was an obvious Hall of Famer. He compiled over 3000 hits and 400 homeruns in an era when that meant something.

His RC probably commands a high price because he is a HOFer and he played for a popular team. Really, there are very few HOF RC's from the 50's and 60's that do not command a high price.

check out psa 7 yaz rc's completed on ebay

He has become an investment-type card it seems.

No. It is because if you are a collector of key rookie cards, then he is one of the few Hall of Famers with cards in the sixties. It doesn't mean Yaz would be considered a top Hall of Famer by baseball standards. Let's separate the hobby side of his popularity from the sporting side. I am not saying he is not popular, but you seem to be insinuating that he is thought of as one baseball's most revered players, bc he played for the Red Sox.

It is trading like an asset class. I definitely agree with you on this. Extremely high correlation.

One of the few?
Define few.

Yaz
McCovey
Williams
Santo
Marichal
Perry
Brock
Stargell
(Rose)
Niekro
Hunter
Perez
Morgan
Carlton
Sutton
Jenkins
Palmer
Carew
Seaver
Bench
Ryan
Fingers
Jackson

Not a small number by my standards.

Wow Lou Gehrig was a BEAST on the road (and at home)!

I know a few old Yankee fans and they remember him as great. One has told me that it was his favorite player. Blasphemy I know..... I wonder what his numbers in Yankee stadium were?

Yes, but how many on this list would you want before Yaz?

Seaver, Bench, Ryan, Jackson

And then Yaz? Where would he rank? Top 25%, 50%?

Hey guys,

This discussion is approaching the "ridiculous".

Forget the numbers, or whatever gobbly-gook some of you are saying against Yaz being a HOFer.

Yaz is one of only two post-WWII ballplayers who have stepped into the "footprints" of a legend and succeeded in Baseball.

The other guy is Mantle...... Incidently guys, I am not a Red Sox fan.

If you stop for a moment to consider the importance of what I am stating here, you will realize how significant this factor is
in sports. Many have tried, and failed. I cannot think of any other ballplayers having succeeded in this situation to the extent
that Yaz and Mantle did.



http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...1961Yaz50x.jpg



TED Z
.

Carew (high number, 7 batting titles). Rose. Morgan. So for me Yaz is at best 8th on the 60s list.

And while they overlapped with Yaz moving to first or DH, whereas Yaz never played with Ted, a pretty decent player named Jim Rice took over in left field in turn for Yaz.

Well, since all of these rookie cards are relatively equal to obtain, I assume that if the 1960 Yaz is ranked that highly, it is because that he is considered a more superior ball player than the rest(ex: Carew batting titles). This goes back to my original point of Yaz being a worthy Hall of Famer, and that he didn't just get in on popularity. Otherwise, how would his card be ranked higher than 50% of the Hall of Famers that you listed.

Ted: didn't Brock essentially take over for Musial? I think Musial was still playing a lot of left field his last year.

I don't know what the argument is. My only point which I stand by is that the public perception of Yaz is a little inflated, due to his popularity. Nobody here is saying he wasn't a worthy HOFer or a great player. You could make the argument that relative to his card values Mantle is overrated, and I would, but that doesn't mean I don't think Mantle wasn't great.

No I agree with you. I was responding to the gentleman earlier who questioned whether Yaz should be in the HOF bc of playoff stats and playing for Boston. That's when you started posting the splits, etc. I must have mistakenly assumed that you were siding with him.

Peter

Brock was already a 4-year established ballplayer (with the Cubs) when he was traded to the Cards. Furthermore, he did not directly step into Musial's "footprints". Musial
played his last game in Sept 1963. Brock was traded to the Cards in the Summer of '64.

Both Mantle and Yaz were 20 year old rookies when they replaced DiMag and Ted W, respectively. And, they directly stepped into the "footprints" of these two great legends.

Think about it, there is significant psychological factor in play here, which is not case in Brock's situation.


TED Z
.

Ted, good points. To be precise Mantle did play one season with Joe D. whereas Yaz simply filled Ted's position the following year. But with the Yankees expected to win the pressure on Mantle was probably greater.

Peter

I recall the Spring of 1952 quite well, Mickey had a slow start (perhaps as you said...."the pressure"). At the beginning, the fans were booing him when he struck out.

As the season progressed, the boos turned into to cheers. Mantle finished 1952....batting .311 with 23 HR's and 87 RBI's. Some of those HR's travelled near 500 feet.

And, the rest is history.


TED Z
.

I remember as a kid when Bobby Murcer was supposed to take over for Mantle. He had a decent career, but it didn't quite work out that way.

From NYT 12-28-52

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...psea335b74.jpg
http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...ps7b1a602a.jpg

Mickey is going to have to ask for a big raise if he ever wants to afford one of his rookie cards.

Ironic, his most sought after card is a 1952 Topps # 311, or was that done intentionally by Topps?

Irv

The # 311 on this card has always amazed me, too. However, it is only by sheer coincidence.

The card was produced before the 1952 season ended. This I can attest to, since I remember
opening a TOPPS 5-cent wax-pack in Sept 1952 and getting this Mickey Mantle......


http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/d...mmantle52t.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...wrapper100.jpg




TED Z
.

Great story, Ted. :)

It was my Father's 77th birthday yesterday and our family all gathered to celebrate it.

Dad and I got talking about the 52 Topps cards he gave me but can't specifically remember buying them?
He collected comic books and coins back then and assumes he purchased them but the more we talked the more he guessed/got confused that maybe someone else gave them to him?

He said he did remember receiving his BeeHive hockey cards that were given to him so he thinks, again, that maybe he did purchase those 52 Topps cards for some reason?

Judging by last night, I don't think the mystery will ever be solved?

Needless to say, I am glad he held onto them for all these years! :D

P.S. Forgot to add. Your card has a similar looking crease/mark to the left of Mickeys face as what mine does, and our 2 aren't the only ones I have seen like that?:confused:

Irv

Talk about coincidences....your Mantle and mine have very similar "creases".

Actually, on my card it's not a crease, it's a "surface wrinkle" or a scratch (as, it does not appear on the back of the card).

And, a Happy Birthday to your Dad.


TED Z
.

I Agree Peter, maybe even lower for me. This guy hit .260 on the road for his career! Yes, a ton of All-Star appearances, but these are voted on by the fans. This gets me back to the Boston/ Fenway mystique supporting his popularity....Everybody loved Yaz and Fisk....

I'll have to have another closer look in hand at mine but IIRC, I don't believe mine has any creases/marks/anomalies on the back either?

And thank you for the birthday wishes! :D

It just seems wrong that his rookie card in pristine condition is worth more than mickey made in his whole career!

Players salaries weren't exorbitant yet. Now they are kind of out of whack, imo.....Maybe they should cap contracts at like 100M or something to keep ticket prices down and make going to a game affordable again?....

Yaz rookies are not that scarce....

Yeah, except that it would effect ticket prices a bit. The owners know the point at which they can price tickets to maximize profits. All that would happen is that ownership would make more money.