What’s the obsession with Mickey Mantle?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

I think I would do a little sabermetric research, Steve. Mantle is one of just 7 players in the history of the game to produce more than 200% of league average runs created (credit to Bill James, who ranks Mantle as the 5th best major league player of all time). His 215% in that category, going by recollection, is tied for third with Lou Gehrig, behind only Ruth, at 240%, and Williams, at 250%. His OBPS+ of 172 is fifth best of all time, I believe (behind, going by memory, only Ruth at 204; Williams at 190; Hornsby at 175; and Gehrig at 174), considerably ahead of Mays (156) and Aaron (155). His on base percentage alone--.421--is among the very best of all time, far beyond Mays and Aaron, who were each in the .380 range. Per James in the early 2000's, his 1961 season--54 HR's, 128 RBI, .317 BA, 126 walks, .448 OBP--although great stats, and ranked by James as the 15th best season of all time, is MERELY MANTLE'S THIRD BEST SEASON (both his 1956 triple crown year and his 1957 season were better)!. Add in 12 pennants in his first 14 seasons to go with 7 world championships = Mantle don't give up nothin' to nobody (or at least very, very little!). In short, objectively, there is absolutely no OBJECTIVE dispute that he does indeed rank with the greatest to ever play the game.

James also wrote that although Mantle and Mays appeared to have similar production in their peak years, Mays was actually making about 60 or more outs per year than Mantle, based on the fact that the Mick walked, much, much more often (hence the higher OBP) and grounded into roughly just half as many double plays.

I haven't read through every previous post at this somewhat late hour, but if your first post was in jest, as the objective stats indicate that it might well have been, please excuse the above dissertation. I do agree, however, that his '52 Topps, although iconic, is overpriced. A near mint example, for instance, was priced at around $30,000 in 1991, and hence has only increased in value in the 5 to 6% compounded annually range, having had its ups and downs, as one would expect, considering its' ready availability. A really good collectible should be at least 10% or better compounded annually through the last 25 years or so if purchased for investment purposes.

Best wishes,

Larry

Bill James has Mantle 6th. He has Mays 3rd behind only Ruth and Wagner. So why isn't Willie Mays the face of post-war baseball cards? It is a valid question.

[Snapolit1]

Maybe 400 or 500 posts from now someone will get close to the actual reason. I will stay tuned.

[MVSNYC]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Maybe 400 or 500 posts from now someone will get close to the actual reason. I will stay tuned.

Bob Costas explained it in post #22.

[aconte]

It's 2018, I don't need a reason. He's the best.

When a non-collecting friend hears I collect cards, normally the first question
asked is "Do you got any Mantles?" If you feel, his cards aren't worth owning
this is fine. I'm sure there are a couple others that would agree. Most that
think his cards are worth having may not have seen him play except on
film.

Maybe fifty years from now, no one will care. But I'm betting if Mantle
cards aren't chased after and are worth much less, then all the other
Mays, Aarons, Robinsons, Clementes, etc will be worth less too.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Maybe 400 or 500 posts from now someone will get close to the actual reason. I will stay tuned.

Plenty of posts in this thread have mentioned the myriad reasons why Mantle occupies the lofty perch he does in the Post War card world. If you’re looking for one mathematical reason, you won’t be getting that kind of answer. It is a confluence of many factors, many of which involve what some call the intangibles. With a modicum of effort it’s not so hard to grasp.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

Bill James has Mantle 6th. He has Mays 3rd behind only Ruth and Wagner. So why isn't Willie Mays the face of post-war baseball cards? It is a valid question.

He didn't play for the Yankees, he wasn't in the WS every year, he didn't have the mystique of overcoming handicapping pain, and he wasn't blonde with folk hero looks.

[Johnny630]

The obsession is money, bottom line period. His cards hold value everyone wants them. Beautiful ones sell, ones that have been ran over buy a tuck sell....it’s crazy but we all know it’s true. Mantle and Ruth are two names that will always be the last card a collector wants to sell.

[guy3050]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

The obsession is money, bottom line period. His cards hold value everyone wants them. Beautiful ones sell, ones that have been ran over buy a tuck sell....it’s crazy but we all know it’s true. Mantle and Ruth are two names that will always be the last card a collector wants to sell.

Not according To Ebay

https://www.ebay.com/sch/212/i.html?...mantle&_sop=16

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by rats60

Bill James has Mantle 6th. He has Mays 3rd behind only Ruth and Wagner. So why isn't Willie Mays the face of post-war baseball cards? It is a valid question.

RACE, my friend, RACE

[rats60]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

RACE, my friend, RACE

Then why aren't Jackie Robinson and Roberto Clemente cards cheap? They are black and their cards are worth more than Ted Williams.

[Mark70Z]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

RACE, my friend, RACE

It may have to do with race with certain individuals, but I wouldn’t collect anything Mays because, in my experience, he’s just not a nice person. I couldn’t collect someone that I didn’t like off the field as well as on. That’s just me though.

[barrysloate]

Although Mantle struggled early in his career, he was known for hitting prodigious home runs, most famously the 565-foot blast at Griffith Stadium in 1953, and the ball that nearly went out of Yankee Stadium, just missing when it hit the top of the facade in right field. These blasts help cement his Paul Bunyon reputation, but it was just one factor of many.

He was a blue-eyed blonde-haired kid from the hardscrabble town of Commerce, Oklahoma, who came to the big city and became its hero; he played for the best team in baseball, which won the World Series nearly every year; he played in the 1950's, arguably one of the Golden Ages of baseball; and he won back-to-back MVP's, including the Triple Crown in 1956. All of these things, including others, cemented his legendary status.

If you grew up in the 1950's and 60's and followed baseball, you would understand why Mantle was so beloved. Just looking at his stats today only tells a part of the story.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by rats60

Bill James has Mantle 6th. He has Mays 3rd behind only Ruth and Wagner. So why isn't Willie Mays the face of post-war baseball cards? It is a valid question.

No. As I stated, James has Mantle as the 5th best MAJOR LEAGUE PLAYER of all time. He has Oscar Charleston ahead of the Mick, but Oscar never played in even a single major league game. In addition, much of the earlier Negro Leagues' schedules included games with semi-pro teams, against whom Oscar would have had a big-time edge. As I've said before, James denies he was being politically correct, but Oscar's rating by necessity must be based on hearsay many times over, myth, smoke and illusion. It certainly has no evidentiary foundation, though I'm sure Charleston was indeed a very good player.

Best wishes, Rats 60. Nice to see you speak Bill James quite fluently,

Larry

[Peter_Spaeth]

I question ranking Mantle ahead of Ted, although it's only by one place.

Speaking of James, at this point I guess he's not going to update his all time great book from the late 90s, too bad it would be fascinating.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I question ranking Mantle ahead of Ted, although it's only by one place.

Speaking of James, at this point I guess he's not going to update his all time great book from the late 90s, too bad it would be fascinating.

To me, and I think James, Mantle gets the nod because of his greater value on defense. Having seen him in his prime, he was indeed, as James describes him, a very, very good centerfielder and better baserunner. From a purely offensive value standpoint, it is Ted by about 14% going by James' runs created formula versus league average player, and by about 9.5% by the less accurate OPS+.

Highest regards,

Larry

[ronniehatesjazz]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Seriously. There was this mythology about the 52 card being printed late and scads of them buried at sea. Now all sorts of other Mantle cards seem to be steadily increasing in value. What’s the obsession with Mantle? Are there a few hundred thousand Billy Crystal clones out there. Babe Ruth sure. Jackie sure. I get those. They are part of the fabric of American history. But Mantle was a big strong galoot who hit some amazing dingers. Not denigrating his stats, but don’t understand the collecting obsession around him.

Think if Mike Trout played on the Yankees dynasty from mid 90’s to early 00’s. Maybe not the perfect analogy but the best I could come up with.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Trout's a good analogy but IMO people just don't relate to the modern day superstars with their mega-salaries and agents and entourages the same way they related to players of the past like Mantle who were not levels removed socioeconomically or otherwise from the fan base.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Trout's a good analogy but IMO people just don't relate to the modern day superstars with their mega-salaries and agents and entourages the same way they related to players of the past like Mantle who were not levels removed socioeconomically or otherwise from the fan base.

Trout seems to be very much a down-to-earth kind of guy who might well be almost there if his team could pile up the pennants and world championships that Mantle's Yankees did. He's not quite Mantle yet, though, as he's in his prime and has yet to match any of the Mick's top 3 seasons. He's still got time, though. In any event, he gives us a bit of a look at how a young Mantle would have been viewed (fawned over?) from a modern analytical perspective on shows like MLB Now and MLB Tonight.

Regards,

Larry

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Trout's a good analogy but IMO people just don't relate to the modern day superstars with their mega-salaries and agents and entourages the same way they related to players of the past like Mantle who were not levels removed socioeconomically or otherwise from the fan base.

Trout lacks the big seasons like Mantle had in 56, 57, 61 and he lacks the postseason success. Mantle breaking Babe Ruth's World Series record of 15 home runs was a big factor in his popularity.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by rats60

Trout lacks the big seasons like Mantle had in 56, 57, 61 and he lacks the postseason success. Mantle breaking Babe Ruth's World Series record of 15 home runs was a big factor in his popularity.

rats60
Your point is well spoken....the difference between Mickey Mantle and other stars in the post-WWII era is his clutch performance in the 12 World Series (1951-1964) he played in.

Especially, Game 5 of the 1953 W.S. (which I remember as it was yesterday) when he hit a Grand Slam into the upper deck of Ebbets Field. Here's the link to that Grand Slam.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_W...rand_Slam.jpeg

You guys must realize that the World Series of those years were watched (or heard) by many Millions of BB fans, young and old…...and, Mantle was the Man.

I was in Jr. H.S. in the 1950's, and when the World Series started at noon everyday, our teacher would set up a large radio in the classroom so we could listen to the World Series.
Those were the days.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Can you imagine a teacher doing that today, CNN would be investigating, people would be screaming how it stigmatized kids who were not baseball fans, doubtless there would be a cultural offense in there somewhere, the teacher would be fired, lawsuits would follow.

[Stonepony]

Originally Posted by tedzan

rats60
Your point is well spoken....the difference between Mickey Mantle and other stars in the post-WWII era is his clutch performance in the 12 World Series (1951-1964) he played in.

Especially, Game 5 of the 1953 W.S. (which I remember as it was yesterday) when he hit a Grand Slam into the upper deck of Ebbets Field. Here's the link to that Grand Slam.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_W...rand_Slam.jpeg

You guys must realize that the World Series of those years were watched (or heard) by many Millions of BB fans, young and old…...and, Mantle was the Man.


I was in Jr. H.S. in the 1950's, and when the World Series started at noon everyday, our teacher would set up a large radio in the classroom so we could listen to the World Series.
Those were the days.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

When I was in grade school I remember TV sets being set up in the lunch room for late 60s, very early 70s afternoon post season games

[Marc Simmons]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Seriously. There was this mythology about the 52 card being printed late and scads of them buried at sea. Now all sorts of other Mantle cards seem to be steadily increasing in value. What’s the obsession with Mantle? Are there a few hundred thousand Billy Crystal clones out there. Babe Ruth sure. Jackie sure. I get those. They are part of the fabric of American history. But Mantle was a big strong galoot who hit some amazing dingers. Not denigrating his stats, but don’t understand the collecting obsession around him.

Mantle was mythical. Kind of like Roy Hobbs.

[jsq]

before he screwed his leg up he was timed going to first base in 3.1 seconds. fastest guy today is probably 3.4?? look it up. every player who saw him before he screwed his leg up said the same thing, they had never seen anyone that fast on the bases.

as a 165 lb 17 yr old was hitting 450 ft home runs (think how much the mediocre high school or american legion pitcher did NOT help with piitching speed. what were those hacks throwing in rural oklahoma a whopping 85 mph, if you are a good player at 17 hitting an 85 mph fastball is easy and great for getting hits, getting distance.... not so much , so Mantle was providing most of the physics of the distance) as he got older and added 35 - 40 lbs he got stronger and better.

was a winner, teamates loved the guy and viewed him as the key to many of their pennants and world series. go look at some of those yankee teams lots of solid players but some other teams in the league were equally stacked yet could not touch the yankees.

on the negative side, not the brightest guy in the room, played football with his high school buddies on the injured leg after being told to stay off it completely and totally screwed himself. still put up monster numbers with one bum leg. your power comes from your legs. think that through very carefully. yet he still hit 500 plus homers when that still meant something before steroids and guys who play for 40 years (humour related to some of these guys that play forever and produce many good yrs but are not great players)

maybe most importantly mick was a hail fellow well met when sober. people liked him. i met him once with wife along and he was a joy to meet. nice. he was sober at the time.

popularity of a player has a LOT to do with the demand and price for his card. Willie, Joe D who i met and talked with about gambling at atlantic city and was quite nice to my wife and me, and Teddy Ballgame were all over the place as to how they interacted with their fans.

in contrast Mickey was pretty good for the most part, exceptions were when he was drunk and most fans did not interact with the mick when he was drunk. most interacted with the mick at card shows and generally he was a fun guy who met you with a smile and a kind word at the card shows.

just a few reasons his cards are so popular.

[TheNightmanCometh]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Seriously. There was this mythology about the 52 card being printed late and scads of them buried at sea. Now all sorts of other Mantle cards seem to be steadily increasing in value. What’s the obsession with Mantle? Are there a few hundred thousand Billy Crystal clones out there. Babe Ruth sure. Jackie sure. I get those. They are part of the fabric of American history. But Mantle was a big strong galoot who hit some amazing dingers. Not denigrating his stats, but don’t understand the collecting obsession around him.

I'm 39, born long after Mantle's hey day, and even I know why he's in such demand.