[ls7plus]

Trout is the closest thing I've seen to a young Mickey Mantle (power, speed, hitting for average, fielding and on-base-percentage) in 50+ years of waiting for the next one to come along (can you say Rick Reichardt, Bobby Murcer, Kirk Gibson--Sparky's words--and well, you get the idea). Mantle, at Trout's age, however, was winning the triple crown with a .353 BA, 52 HR, and 130 RBI, to go along with 112 walks (the walk total is the best I can remember, off the top of my head). And the Mick followed that up with .365, 34 HR and 146 walks--OBP's and OPS's off the charts. I don't see Trout approaching those heights, even making any adjustment for era that should be made. Even a year like Mantle's '61 campaign--.317, 54 HR, 128 RBI, 126 (?) walks is probably out of his reach (Mantle, by the way, was actually easily the best player not only in '61 over Roger Maris, but for a total of 10 seasons in the AL, per Bill James' win shares system). He also hit tape measure HR's to match McGwire's, but without the artificial additives.

Typically, the demand for the young phenoms is speculative and transient for a significant number of years, artificially inflating their true collector value early on--by "transient," I mean that it tends to move on to the next hotter than hot item. Trout is likely no exception to this phenomenon (pun intended).

The time to buy, if he continues to excel, will be when he inevitably enters his downhill slide in his mid-thirties. By then, his real status will have revealed itself, and the speculative and transient demand will have long since departed. An example--Frank Thomas' 1990 No-Name On Front rookie was priced around $1600 or more in the early to even mid '90's. By 2008 or so, when he was 40, a nice one could be had for less than $600. That was the time to buy. Following his rather recent election to the HOF on the first ballot, what I recall as being an 8.5 sold for just a bit under $3,000, although that price was probably inflated by the recent hullabaloo created by his election.

I too would sell now, put the proceeds into quality vintage items (NOT THE OVERPRICED, LOW TO MIDDLE GRADE MID-FIFTIES KEY ROOKIES! Choose rare and significant pre-war instead, an area where the market is currently much quieter). Chances are you will be able to get the Trout back later for less, perhaps a lot less.

However, Adam is also right--if you really like it, and are not primarily concerned with what the price of the card does, keep it. I have a few cards like that, but also consider my only recent foray (read in the last 12-15 years) into a current player/hot phenom's purchase one I greatly regret. That one was a red refractor of Brennan Boesch in 2010, when he was hitting over .320 in July of that year with 12 HR's, as memory serves. $229.00!!! Though only one of 25, I doubt even Boesch's immediate family would pay $10 for it now! Still have it, but its been kicked under a heavy chest surrounded by other items too troublesome to move. Out of sight, out of mind. Lot's of things can go wrong with young phenoms, even though Trout's track record does continue to be impressive--I definitely enjoy watching him, but still wouldn't consider trading anything of value in the vintage category for such a card.

Best of luck on your decision,

Larry