Jackie Robinson/Willie Mays

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Two wonderful, all-time players. One is better liked than the other, I get that. I don't mean for this to sound morbid, but Willie's early cards are likely to receive a bump when he passes (and I hope that is a long, long time from now). Who is likely the better long term buy? I tend to think the answer is Robinson, but I am not totally sold on that.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Mark70Z]

I would think Robinson. I thought Mays a great player, but off the field not so great.

[G1911]

I would guess Robinson would be more 'card recession proof' than Mays. Mays is a series of great statistics, Robinson is the star feature of a popular narrative that will not fade away from memory as the generation that watched these players unfortunately dies off. Jackie will continue to be talked about by MLB frequently, mentioned in school curriculum's on the Civil Rights Era, and has his number 42 hanging among the retired greats in every stadium. If one cares about investing or selling, Jackie seems to be about as safe a bet as one could possibly make on steady values.

[Phil68]

Originally Posted by G1911

... Robinson is the star feature of a popular narrative that will not fade away from memory as the generation that watched these players unfortunately dies off. Jackie will continue to be talked about by MLB frequently, mentioned in school curriculum's on the Civil Rights Era, and has his number 42 hanging among the retired greats in every stadium. If one cares about investing or selling, Jackie seems to be about as safe a bet as one could possibly make on steady values.

Agree completely.
Not even close. Jackie Robinson. I mean, it's not even a comparable thing. It wouldn't matter if Willie Mays had hit 800 homeruns and was elected "Greatest Dude Ever".
Jackie Robinson's social contribution will make him second only to Mickey Mantle and, perhaps, Babe Ruth, in investment potential.

[Phil68]

As I think about it...it's interesting that Mays is so far behind Mantle in terms of desirability. I understand post-seasons and exposure...Yankee mania, blonde hair, blue eyes. That would account for some difference. The difference, however, is astounding. Obviously, we're all thinking race.
I can't fathom another plausible reason for such an amazing disparity.
If Mays had broken the official color barrier--and not Robinson, I believe he'd be comparable to Mantle in terms of prices.

[Mark70Z]

Plausible reason (at least from my perspective) = he’s not very nice off the field. I wouldn’t collect any of his stuff myself just for that reason; doesn’t matter how good he was on the field.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Phil68

As I think about it...it's interesting that Mays is so far behind Mantle in terms of desirability. I understand post-seasons and exposure...Yankee mania, blonde hair, blue eyes. That would account for some difference. The difference, however, is astounding. Obviously, we're all thinking race.
I can't fathom another plausible reason for such an amazing disparity.
If Mays had broken the official color barrier--and not Robinson, I believe he'd be comparable to Mantle in terms of prices.

I don’t think it’s race. The big players from the 1950’s who sell far above what their statistics would indicate are Mantle, Robinson, and Clemente. If being white drove card values, Al Kaline, who has about the same career statistical value in the same time at the same position on a probably more popular team would outsell Clemente. Instead Clemente easily triples Kalines values in most releases.


If being a white blonde Yankee drove card values (and there is a price bump for being a Yankee or a Brooklyn Dodger), Whitey Ford would outsell the Jewish Koufax instead of being available for like a fourth of his price.


The mixed race Jeter and Griffey Jr. dominate values in the modern era hobby, even though neithers stats warrant their elevation far above all their contemporaries.


I’ve never met a collector who seeks out blondes, or even white players in general (there are a number of Jewish race-based collectors). I don’t think Mantle collectors are looking at photos of Mickey and Willie, and deciding they don’t like Mays’ skin, so they’ll bid double on Mickey.


Players with great stories sell for more, whether it’s Robinson persevering through injustice, Clemente’s humanitarian work and tragic death, or Mickey’s public struggles both internally and with injuries, drink and sin, a classic American archetype narrative, it raises interest in that player.


Another big factor is that having an iconic card increases value across the board. Griffey is certainly aided in his hobby love by the classic 1989 Upper Deck. The high number 52 Mantle has been a hobby classic since the 70’s and has played a heavy role in making Mantle king of the postwar era. If Mays had been the one in the 6th series, things might have been different.


Mays doesn’t have the narrative, has a reputation as a generally surly man, (Brooks Robinson doesn’t have the narrative either, but his reputation for accommodating fans and being a kind man surely has helped his card hobby), and played for a less popular team that was nowhere near as successful as Mantle’s clubs. It’s also not like Mays is undervalued, he’s right there as the second most expensive non-rookie card in many sets, usually competing with Robinson, Clemente, Ted Williams and Aaron. If hobbyists were racially motivated to buy cards of whites, I don’t think we’d have the majority of the most popular 50’s players in the hobby being black. Mantle, Koufax, Ted Williams, Aaron, Jackie, Mays, and Clemente are generally the most collected players of this period and bring the highest prices. The one set Paige appears in without the rookie factor, he also outsells every white except Mantle.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Phil68

As I think about it...it's interesting that Mays is so far behind Mantle in terms of desirability. I understand post-seasons and exposure...Yankee mania, blonde hair, blue eyes. That would account for some difference. The difference, however, is astounding. Obviously, we're all thinking race.

I actually think it has less to do with race than it does time and circumstance. When the boomers took the card hobby from an underground thing to mainstream in the late 1970’s / early 80’s - Mantle was their guy. From the getgo, the cards that generation found the most desirable were Mantle over everyone. This has to do with being a Yankee and constantly in the WS, yes. The exposure Mantle got in the 1950’s and early 60’s made him the most recognizable face in baseball, and that is what the people who took the card hobby to new heights had on their minds when they did it.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jchcollins]

Mays may be the greatest all-around position player who ever lived, but Jackie Robinson did something singular / unique in American history in addition to being a famous ball player. Starting perhaps 5 years ago, I noticed that Jackie cards on eBay with BIN’s all seemed to have ridiculous price tags. You might could negotiate a seller down on a midgrade or lower card, but Robinson always starts high. Then in particular, his early issues like 1948 Leaf and the 1949 and ‘50 Bowman cards really shot through the roof in value, even in lower grades. People aren’t soon going to forget Willie Mays by a long shot, but I think the historical uniqueness of Robinson will make him a slightly better investment for a long time to come.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Mays may be the greatest all-around position player who ever lived, but Jackie Robinson did something singular / unique in American history in addition to being a famous ball player. Starting perhaps 5 years ago, I noticed that Jackie cards on eBay with BIN’s all seemed to have ridiculous price tags. You might could negotiate a seller down on a midgrade or lower card, but Robinson always starts high. Then in particular, his early issues like 1948 Leaf and the 1949 and ‘50 Bowman cards really shot through the roof in value, even in lower grades. People aren’t soon going to forget Willie Mays by a long shot, but I think the historical uniqueness of Robinson will make him a slightly better investment for a long time to come.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It was shortly after the movie 42 came out, 2013.

Also, willie has had another 25 years aftwr mantle to not please the autograph seekers

[todeen]

I grew up in Billings, MT and Spokane, WA. I never saw a baseball autograph session of a HOF player in MT. The Rockies came on a caravan once. In Spokane, we had a card store that operated 3-4 years and invited HOF players, and the biggest name that came to town was Al Kaline. Great guy. Never have met Willie, Mantle died while I lived in Montana. I think of Mantle more often than Mays simply because of '61. When the Sosa and McGwire chase happened, Mantle's and Maris' name came up all the time. I decided to collect the 1961 Topps set for that simple reason. I didn't collect it because Mays was in the set.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[jchcollins]

A lot of the discussion here reminds me of why I’ve always been careful not to get too close personally to my ballplayer heroes as people. Because invariably, you are going to be let down. If you’ve seen Ken Burns’ Baseball, the segment “Good at Life” talking about Pete Rose is what I’m talking about here. Yes, Mays is well known for his bad behavior with fans, but Mantle, Ted Williams, Frank Robinson, and countless others were no angels either. Why is their behavior overlooked / forgiven, while Willie’s is not?

It may not be “right”, but I have to draw a line with respect to my personal motivations for collecting with this kind of stuff. For me, that generally includes nostalgia, history, and grasping for the fleeting feeling of youth gone by above everything else. Few would disagree that as a player on the field, Willie Mays was easily one of the top 3-5 non-pitchers who ever lived. Along with Mantle and Aaron, he was one of the top figures in baseball that played into the nostalgia we associate with the sport today from the 1950’s and 60’s. I guess it becomes a question for some on where to draw the line. Do people think differently of Duke Snider or Willie McCovey now in the 21st century because of their tax problems that have come to light? Doubtful. So we should shun Mays because of his boorish behavior? I get it if that is your conclusion. It’s just not mine yet.