Will there be a post-war card again like the 52 Mantle ?
Did the 52 Mantle hit at the perfect time ? Decades ago not many would have said a post-war baseball card would command over a million dollars.
Do you think there will ever be a "big one" like the Mantle to hit or is it all over past the 52 Mick ? |
Quote:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk |
Will never have one again where it isnt condition sensitve. Maybe cards that are PSA 10s etc.
But to me a real card with value means if it had a rip in it or part of it is ripped off...its still worth $500+...... The 1952 Mantle is still worth that if its ripped apart and taped together. You wont see that with any other card post war that we dont know about.. ... Playing games with POP due to artificial scarcity of PSA 10s is a whole different animal.. you could have an aaron judge PSA 10 that is POP 1 40 years ago thats worth money....but one that is ripped apart and taped together will be worthless for example |
Agree with Jason. I don’t think the artificially-created scarcity of the modern era can ever create the level of demand that exists for the natural scarcity of vintage
cards. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
cards will be the least of our concerns
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
No, never again... the card companies long ago ruined that...maybe a 1 of 1 Mike Trout auto rookie 4 color patch card graded gem mint 10. If that even exists... and if he is in top 5 all time in top offensive categories and unanimous HOF first time ballot.... lol
|
Not baseball but...
Jordan rookie . |
I think it could happen. The '68 Ryan/Koosman and the '89 UD Griffey are already very popular, but not as much as the Mantle. Mickey Mantle defined the 1950s and 60s for baseball, and until someone else does that, there will not be another '52 Mantle. Also, I think that even with manufactured scarcity there can still be huge demand for some cards, take the 2008 Topps Kershaw for example.
Just my thoughts Owen |
Quote:
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/1968-Topps-17...item2387fdcdbe |
I doubt there will be another 52 Mantle sort of situation anytime soon. It's got all the things that make for a really expensive collectible.
It's not common at all, but not so rare that someone couldn't find one. The subject is incredibly popular, even across generations. Bonus for the subject being possibly the biggest star from the biggest media market, And that he was that star at just about the perfect time. It's got a good backstory, maybe not as good as the Wagner, but the fewer produced/not necessarily available everywhere/Excess unsaleable inventory being dumped off a trash barge by the company is a pretty good one. Today there's too much access to the players for them to be as revered as the players in the 50's. The PED era leaves most of us with just a bit of doubt/mistrust. Cards are widely collected, so most get saved as opposed to thrown out. Companies just don't usually operate in ways that would lead to a great backstory, and if for some reason they did we're all too jaded to find it amazing. Imagine if Mantle had played for Kansas City, and was regularly in the paper for drinking too much and saying crass things, and the High numbers had hung around the warehouse for a decade or two until they got sold to the Christmas racks makers. No matter how great he was his card would be just another star card. |
"Imagine if Mantle had played for Kansas City..."
...the Yankees would have traded Johnny Hopp (or whomever) for him, and everything else would be unchanged. |
Just to add to what others have said....
There can't be another card like the '52 Mantle because: 1. Cards have been somewhat commoditized (is that a word?). There are printed values so the awareness of even every day non-collectors is there? How many people try to sell their baseball card collections and think they are sitting on a lot of money before ultimately realizing the junk era wasn't going to be their retirement? 2. Piggybacking off that, many people see baseball cards as an investment now. It's no longer a hobby. What Beckett and PSA have done to the hobby is kill the casual hobby part of it. For many that's not a bad thing, but it changed everything. 3. I'm not into modern cards at all, but it does seem interest is higher than it has been in a long time. But that interest is in how many autos, relics, etc you find, and the rest are throw aways. That may not be a ton different from earlier years... We were all looking for the superstars when we opened packs, but we weren't looking so that we could turn around and sell that autographed card for $1,000 right out of the pack. 4. I also wonder what so many options will do to the business 10-15 years ago. How many different cards can Topps make? Topps, Topps Chrome, Stadium Club, Finest, Allen & Ginter, Gypsy Queen, Archives, Heritage, Definitive Collection, Fire, Gold Label, Topps Now, Bunt, Museum Collection, Bowman, Bowman Chrome, Platinum... Hell my head hurts now. Will too many options cause confusion over what to collect and ultimately lead to people losing interest or will one of these become that Holy Grail if a player becomes a superstar? 5. Lastly, as someone else pointed out there is too much access. Too much baseball on TV. There is no longer any mystery about a player. Word of mouth details about players lives is now photos and social media put out immediately. Even though everyone know who Mickey Mantle was, it was still rare to be able to see him play unless you were in an American League city. How often could you watch the Yankees on TV in the 50's? With no mystery, I believe, nothing like the '52 Mantle can happen again. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Highest regards, Larry PS: Jordan probably is the only athlete since Mantle to have made a similar impact on the professional sports scene. |
Just adding to my previous statement, the Mantle card had so many different factors which contributed to the cards' fame.
1. He was a superstar, everyone knew his name by the mid-50s. 2. Iconic design ('52 topps). 3. Relative level of scarcity (while there are rarer early mantle cards like the '52 Berk Ross, the 52 Mantle's popularity was immensely boosted by it's notoriety for being tougher than many other 52 cards). 4. Interesting stories about the card, such as the tale of the NYC Harbor '52 high# cases (even if it may be made up). 5. Made in a important year for the player (most of the time a rookie, or in this case a year off being a rookie). An example of a card that comes fairly close is the Billy Ripken 89 Fleer, which fits into 1, 3 and 4 (less so 1, but he was still a very noteworthy player). The chances of this all happening again in the near future are quite low, but I think it is entirely possible. Just my thoughts, Owen |
Quote:
It is the first major set for a company making baseball cards for 65+ years aligning with a 2nd year card of the star of the greatest dynasty in baseball history. |
The key requirement we may never see again was that cards were assumed to have no actual value at the time, hence were not generally retained or preserved. Nowadays, just about everything is an instant collectible, hence sought after, preserved, hoarded, etc.
The question I have is how much Mantle's value is buttressed by a fan base that actually saw him in his prime and idolized him. These fans would be at least 65-70 by now, hence unlikely to influence the card market 50 years from now. By then, Mantle goes from being the God of their youths to "just" a Top 15 or so player. I'm sure the iconic past of the card will hold some influence but I don't think the influence will be total or permanent. Jason Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk |
Quote:
For your information, Eddie Mathews is ranked as the second greatest third baseman of all time (third by Bill James, behind Schimidt (#1) and Brett (#2)) and may well have become number one but for a significant shoulder injury he suffered in 1962. He had 370 HR's before he was 30, prior to that injury. Study the game's history (reading about it should be enjoyable and not work), which becomes even richer as SABER and analytics advance with time, and learn something! You might even want to watch a little "MLB Now" on your cable network, a show which devotes quite a bit of time to baseball analytics. The latter will have an even greater, not lesser, impact over time. Regards, Larry |
Quote:
I was asked by dealers I have known for many, many years at the National in Chicago what was going to happen to the value of Mantle cards once those who actually saw him play passed on. My answer was simple, and one I would classify as a basic truism: exactly the same thing as happened over time to Ruth, Cobb, Gehrig, Wagner and other such cards. The fact that there are more of the Mantles may well make them more cyclical in their appreciation, but I don't think you will go wrong over the long term in tucking away some of his very toughest in the highest grade you can find or afford now. Happy collecting, Larry |
I once held a raw '52 Mantle in my grubby childhood hands in the mid-1970s. It belonged to my friend's dad and even then the card had a mythical status. Can't imagine there will be another like it. I remember people hoarding rookie cards of Todd Van Poppel and Gregg Jefferies and other speculative phenoms in the late '80s and early '90s. I had shelved my collection then and, seeing that hysteria, I figured I'd never be able to get back into it.
|
Quote:
With the changes free agency brought for the financial end of things, came a change in how a career was viewed. Players and teams began taking a longer view, and eventually a more common view that the team they played for was just temporary until contract time or before if the team felt they could fill more lineup gaps with a trade. So players actually took time to rehab injuries, with an eye to extending their career. Even at the now old fashioned 2-3 million a year why play hurt and shorten your career by even a couple years. As a fan, it gets harder to really think of a player the way players in the past were viewed. When I was a kid, Yaz was always there, and the perhaps rose colored glasses kept him as a great player long past his prime. (Same for Rice) When the players move around more that just doesn't happen. I can only think of a couple recent players that even get close to that, Jeter and Ortiz. Players aren't generally as flashy, and in some baseball ways that's not a bad thing. Would Mays famous catch happen today? With scouting and advanced video study he'd probably be playing deeper, and not have to make such a long run to get to the ball. Better for teams and players to be positioned better, maybe not as good for the fans. Biggio fits that pretty well, 20 years without much in the way of injuries, a nice run of years well above average, stayed with the same team the whole time, and managed to average just barely over 150 hits a year. So what we've ended up with are a lot (probably more than in the 50's) of players who are very good for a very long time, but aren't quite as electric as the top players back then. It's hard to have someone become almost mythical like Mantle or Ruth without that flashiness, with loads of access, without the prolonged local adulation, and without as much press. NY players, even the merely above average get a lot more national press than almost anyone. Boston and Chicago would probably be a close second. |
Quote:
|
There are some very scarce cards being made today that are virtually unknown to most collectors. The problem being that there are waaaay too many cards being made recently that these cards get lost in the masses and are basically ignored. Someday, there may be a demand for one of these modern rarities and the collectors will take note and drive values up, but there are a lot of factors involved to make that happen if at all.
I like the Jordan rookie because that falls into the category of a completely ignored junk card that exploded in popularity years later. People realized how limited it was, but that card was unique in that had no competition and stands on its on merit. (Other than the Star rookies). |
Quote:
However, with today's generation, that may change going forward? |
Another thing I believe made a difference is that New York was still the primary mecca for most news stories and especially sports. Also the fact that there were less teams to follow and a smaller geographical area. I think a lot of those on the west coast where there were no teams would have naturally chosen to follow New York teams and specifically the Yankees.
|
Quote:
For modern collectors, the Jordan image on that card is every bit as iconic a post-war card as the '52 Topps Mantle. |
Quote:
Outside of the 1/xx varieties which suffer from being such a regular part of a product today, there are other things that were produced in fairly low quantities that get no interest whatsoever. Like entire sets that are less common than the 86 Jordan but have values in the cents rather than hundreds or thousands of dollars. Steve B |
Quote:
I am not sure, unlike the modern era, if scarcities back in the day were intentionally produced or not? I am guessing no? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Ivy Andrews in The George C Millers, the winners in the union oil sets, 62 Topps presentation sets, Topps, Fleer and Score tiffany sets......probably a few I've missed.
|
Quote:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk |
Quote:
http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/...ly-discovered/ The SGC 10 McKinley card currently at auction in REA is at $27,000 Another legendary rarity is the "Strongman" card from the 1935 Schutter-Johnson "I'm Going to Be" set. That set listed various occupations and the Strongman card was the near impossible card so that the company would not have to give away too many prizes. The only known "Strongman" card sold for $22,000 at REA in 2014. http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/...iving-example/ Another legendary non-sport rarity is the "Cowboy Outfit" card from the 1933 Wild West Series. The card was intentionally short-printed so that manufacturer Gum Inc. would not have to give away too many complete cowboy outfits. A raw "Cowboy Outfit" card sold $4,100 at REA in 2013. http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/...-premium-card/ |
Quote:
|
I think the following are good to hold up in value over time :
86 Fleer Jordan 90 Topps Frank Thomas No Name 81 Topps Basketball ( Bird & Johnson Rookie Card + Irving ) 89 Upper Deck Griffey Jr. |
The 2009 Bowman Chrome auto of Mike Trout is really, really popular. I sold mine (and really regret it; I'll have to buy it again when I get back to work). The guy's off to a ridiculous start to his career. If he can keep it up, there's only a finite number of these autos. The demand will continue to grow over time, and supply will become scarce, especially in the best conditions. Having a certified autograph only makes it more valuable.
But will it ever match the demand for the Mick's '52 Topps? No. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Best of luck in your collecting, Larry |
Quote:
As far as the 52T Mantle, it is what it is because of what I posted, things that preceded James and others. Nothing they say is going to change that. |
Quote:
May you get all you seek from collecting, Larry |
I tend to view the sabermetrics with a big grain of salt, particularly when comparing across eras. Taking basketball as an example, where I think the point is more easily made, analytics would speak to the tremendous dominance of George Mikan over his 1950s peers much more than--for example--Hassan Whiteside over his peers today. That said, I have to beleive that Whiteside would completely shut down Mikan and dunk all over him if a time machine allowed for such a match.
Similarly, I imagine there are guys playing baseball today with WAR at zero who would dominate high-WAR players of a century ago. Something incredible about baseball is that we can even consider the possibility that Babe Ruth might actually have possessed more baseball talent than Willie Mays or Jose Altuve, whereas in basketball, track, swimming, football, and just about all other sports it would be laughable to even make a comparison across decades or centuries. So my main point is that sabermetrics answers some questions well and others not at all. But coming back to Mantle, I do beleive his perceived greatness will diminish over time as ballplayers continue to get faster, stronger, and more athletic. He may become more Mikan and less Ruth. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk |
Will offer the player/card that I believe has the best chance to go 100x present value. It's not Mike Trout, Aaron Judge, Kris Bryant or anyone else we've already imagined as a future Hall of Famer. To an extent, the bubbles are already inflated around those players.
In fact, it's not even a current player. And for that matter, his sport isn't even baseball. Good chance you can't stand him and think he sucks, but I won't go there at the moment. I'm talking of course about Colin Rand Kaepernick. "WTF?!?!?!" you ask! But here's why I think his odds are higher than anybody else. Let's say history remembers him as an anti-American, troublemaking, borderline NFL talent. And maybe there's a 90% chance we end up there. Then clearly his cards are nothing special...kindling, birdcage liner, etc. But now let's say his movement has the opposite effect on America and his legacy as an athlete-activist is mentioned in the same breath as Jackie Robinson and Muhammad Ali. America would have to change a lot for this to happen. A whole lot. And maybe a team would even need to sign Kaep and then make a surprise Super Bowl run. But I'd say the chances of any of this are higher than any card we're hoarding today blowing up 100x. Add to it, perhaps, the fact that many collectors have burned or discarded their Kaep cards--or at least said eff it to third party grading and encapsulation, meaning scarcity at high grades could kick in too. (And many of his RCs were already scarce to begin with.) I'm not positing this to elicit any love/hate responses about the man himself. Rather, I'm offering a scenario I consider as plausible for how any collectible we already know about could somehow increase 100x. One could argue that a "common player" like Grant Dayton could win the next 14 Cy Young Awards and then be elected POTUS, in which we'd see 100x as well. True, but I think Kaep has the much more plausible path to cardboard royalty. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk |
Mantle came into superstardom right at the time when baseball cards were becoming more popular and common among children. Topps had just begun its annual set. And there were more children growing up in the US during the 50s and 60s than in any era previous or since (the baby boom). So that card really was a zeitgeist of sorts for the hobby.
I think if you looked at the history of sports in America, guys like Ruth, Bobby Jones, Jack Dempsey, perhaps a few others, were all even more popular in their time than Mantle was, but nowadays the average person probably doesn't know who they were. As the boomer generation passes on, I think the Topps Mantle will become much less important than it is today. |
Among people my age (I'm 34) and younger who are serious or even casual baseball fans, Mantle has taken on more of the mythical Ruthian type persona from what I've witnessed growing up and now as an adult. We're nearly 50 years since Mantle last played and 22 since he passed. I remember that day pretty well actually. My father who actually worked with his mom by stadium as a kid and teennager in the 1950s and 1960s, called into WFAN the day after Mantle's passing to reminisce about Mantle and actually cried on air. I've never seen another grown man of 50 years old cry over the passing of a baseball player, athlete, celebrity or anything of the sort before or since.
Fast forward to today, the hobby is strong although taken over by the forced scarcity 1 of 1 refractor autograph game used jersey rookie cards graded a rainbow label 12 by BGS, there is a still a huge market for not just the 52T but any Mantle. I don't see that changing any time soon. The demand for vintage and the days of hobby simplicity will always be strong. Heck, I know I'm not the only 30 something on this board and I bet there are many younger than me. In the age of youtube and the internet, there is just enough footage and stories available to keep Mantle's legend alive and well for many future generations to come. |
The Trout Bowman rookie will in my opinion be an immortal card like the 52 Mantle. It's value is absurd already and it has the same hallmarks of the Mantle: it's not really even a rare card.
|
Quote:
And contrary to what you may have read above, objectively and logically, it is highly unlikely that the Yankees would have won 12 pennants and seven world championships in the Mick's first 14 years with any other player whatsoever of his time substituted for him on those 1951-1964 teams. IMHO, to contend otherwise is nothing more than errant nonsense. Best wishes, Larry |
Modern analytics are definitely quantitative, but we should not confuse them with mathematical or scientific truth. They are imperfect even relative to what they purport to measure, which itself is only a proxy for greatness.
I'm not disrespecting Mantle or Bill James here...just disputing that there is or was any sort of rigorous proof that Mantle is/was one of the six greatest players ever. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk |
Quote:
Please note that I am not speaking of "WAR" (wins above replacement) here, which I believe stands for worthless, analytical rat shit, because it employs estimates of defensive runs saved which it then integrates into a player's total "WAR" rating. MLB Now had the gentleman in charge of calculating defensive runs saved on as a guest, and broadcaster-reporter-writer Rosenthal got him to admit that a defensive run saved as credited to a player is not actually a defensive run saved, because the context in which the outstanding defensive play was made is ignored. Example: the shortstop makes a diving catch of a low liner headed up the middle, a ball that without the great catch would have been a hit, with two outs and a runner on third. Obviously, a run was saved defensively in that context. BUT THE POWERS THAT BE THAT CALCULATE SUCH THINGS ALSO CREDIT A DEFENSIVE RUN SAVED IN A SITUATION WHERE THERE WERE TWO OUTS AND NO ONE ON BASE. Obviously, in the latter context, at best, only a (small) fraction of a run was saved--the probability that if the catch had not been made, and the batter's ball had gone through for a hit, the batter, now on first base, would ultimately have scored that inning (a probability which, as I recall, is somewhere between 10 and 15% at best). Teams are going much further with analytics than this, and are using both public and propriety data comprehensively. Virtually every team has an analytics staff now--why? Because it clearly helps them win more games. I would ordinarily say "just my humble opinion," but an "opinion" it most certainly is not. Best of luck to you in your collecting, Larry |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:18 PM. |