Will there be a post-war card again like the 52 Mantle ?

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by rats60

No one cared about how many runs Mantle hypothetically created. No one was playing fantasy baseball in 1952. If it was Willie Mays or Eddie Mathews on the Yankees, hitting 500 Hrs and winning 12 pennants and 7 championships in 14 years, their card would be the million dollar card and Mantle would be much less.

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.

They care about analytics now, and have a great deal since Bill James began to publish his Baseball Abstract in the '80's. Come on in out of the 1950's--in addition to Mantle's superiority over Mays and Aaron during the time they were all active (which goes to quality, rather than quantity established through longevity), it certainly didn't hurt that Mantle's teams won the pennant in 12 of the first 14 years of his career, or that he averaged a home run every 12-point something times at bat FOR TEN, YES TEN, YEARS! And for educational purposes, Mantle's runs created are certainly not "hypothetical." James' arrived at a formula for predicting the number of runs a team would score by an extremely thorough mathematical consideration of both positive and negative events in relation to run scoring which was proven to be incredibly accurate. He then concluded that there was no reason the same formula could not be applied to individual players. wRC+ performs a similar function, while OBPS comes close to doing the same thing in a somewhat shorthand manner.

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

[rats60]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

They care about analytics now, and have a great deal since Bill James began to publish his Baseball Abstract in the '80's. Come on in out of the 1950's--in addition to Mantle's superiority over Mays and Aaron during the time they were all active (which goes to quality, rather than quantity established through longevity), it certainly didn't hurt that Mantle's teams won the pennant in 12 of the first 14 years of his career, or that he averaged a home run every 12-point something times at bat FOR TEN, YES TEN, YEARS! And for educational purposes, Mantle's runs created are certainly not "hypothetical." James' arrived at a formula for predicting the number of runs a team would score by an extremely thorough mathematical consideration of both positive and negative events in relation to run scoring which was proven to be incredibly accurate. He then concluded that there was no reason the same formula could not be applied to individual players. wRC+ performs a similar function, while OBPS comes close to doing the same thing in a somewhat shorthand manner.

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

Again, no one cared about any of that garbage you posted. They cared about the Yankees winning 7 championships and 12 pennants plus Mantle hitting a bunch of home runs, including 18 in the world series. That is why the 1952 Topps Mantle was the most important post war card long before Bill James and Baseball Abstract. I have a master's degree in statistics so you don't need to lecture me.

[clsports]

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).

[irv]

Originally Posted by clsports

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).

Those are manufactured scarcities and aren't viewed as true raritys.
However, with today's generation, that may change going forward?

[Jwkeen]

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.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by irv

Those are manufactured scarcities and aren't viewed as true raritys.
However, with today's generation, that may change going forward?

What always strikes me as funny is how many manufactured rarities there are before the modern era that are avidly sought with no stigma at all.

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

[irv]

Originally Posted by steve B

What always strikes me as funny is how many manufactured rarities there are before the modern era that are avidly sought with no stigma at all.

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

I agree, some things in this hobby just don't make any sense at all. (My Beehive hockey cards come to mind)
I am not sure, unlike the modern era, if scarcities back in the day were intentionally produced or not? I am guessing no?

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by irv

I am not sure, unlike the modern era, if scarcities back in the day were intentionally produced or not? I am guessing no?

Maybe I am misunderstanding your post, but there are lots of intentionally produced scarcities from back in the day -- Nap Lajoie in the 1933 Goudey set, Fred Lindstrom in the 1932 U.S. Caramel set, William McKinley in the 1932 U.S. Caramel Presidents set, Earl Smith in the 1928 Harrington/Yuengling sets, 1923 Maple Crispette Casey Stengel, etc.

[clsports]

Originally Posted by irv

Those are manufactured scarcities and aren't viewed as true raritys.
However, with today's generation, that may change going forward?

I am not talking about stamped 1/1, 1/5, 1/25, etc. cards from the manufacturers. I am referring to cards that are TRULY RARE. I know one card for example that I heard existed, but I have never seen one anywhere. Never on Ebay since it was printed. I looked on Google for images on other web sites and nothing. I will not name this card because I want it and have been looking for a long time to no avail. I am beginning to doubt it exists at all. I bet that card will never be worth much simply because there is zero demand. Well demand of 1. Me. Without demand there is no value. These cards have been thrown away or are sitting in someone's shoebox in an attic.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by rats60

Again, no one cared about any of that garbage you posted. They cared about the Yankees winning 7 championships and 12 pennants plus Mantle hitting a bunch of home runs, including 18 in the world series. That is why the 1952 Topps Mantle was the most important post war card long before Bill James and Baseball Abstract. I have a master's degree in statistics so you don't need to lecture me.

Well, it appears that you are not at all inclined to use it. The SABR and analytical movements are growing in strength and provide mathematical evidence with an ever-growing degree of certainty as to the relative ranking of players over various eras. Employing derogatory terms like "garbage" to such truly invaluable evidentiary matters brings to mind the old adage: "play the fool and people will certainly treat you as one." More and more books are being written based on SABR findings and analytical assessments, and that trend will with virtual certainty continue. Baseball card collectors read these books too. Only an ostrich lives its life by perpetually sticking its head in the ground.

Best of luck in your collecting,

Larry

[rats60]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Well, it appears that you are not at all inclined to use it. The SABR and analytical movements are growing in strength and provide mathematical evidence with an ever-growing degree of certainty as to the relative ranking of players over various eras. Employing derogatory terms like "garbage" to such truly invaluable evidentiary matters brings to mind the old adage: "play the fool and people will certainly treat you as one." More and more books are being written based on SABR findings and analytical assessments, and that trend will with virtual certainty continue. Baseball card collectors read these books too. Only an ostrich lives its life by perpetually sticking its head in the ground.

Best of luck in your collecting,

Larry

The only "mathematical" evidence has been provided by Nate Silver discrediting much of this line of thinking. I have read a lot of this, including Bill James, but I have an education and a mind to think for myself. Some is sound, much is not. I am not going to just believe something because it is posted on the internet. Sadly many do.

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.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by rats60

The only "mathematical" evidence has been provided by Nate Silver discrediting much of this line of thinking. I have read a lot of this, including Bill James, but I have an education and a mind to think for myself. Some is sound, much is not. I am not going to just believe something because it is posted on the internet. Sadly many do.

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.

It's ok if you want to think that, just like my sister used to tell my then 3-year-old nephew, "it's ok to want that." The only situation where you are likely to get into trouble is if you expect others to follow your lead in this area. Personally, I think we can agree to disagree. Simply for purposes of your edification, my knowledge of the game, the work of SABR and baseball analytics, as well as baseball history, has not been gleaned from the internet. Instead, it has come from critically reading literally hundreds of baseball books of all sorts: biographies, analysis-focused books seeking to place players from different eras into their proper place in comparison with players of different eras, and even baseball fiction, in addition to watching literally thousands of games from the early '60's on, and playing as many in summer leagues, HS, and the over 30 fast-pitch hardball league against former pros, college players, and high school stars. There is much to be learned from such sources.

May you get all you seek from collecting,

Larry