Can we have a honest conversation about psa

[homerunderby]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

PSA in the early 1990's saw a business opportunity in the hobby - no different than the folks who invented toploaders and plastic pages 15 or more years earlier. It was no surprise, and honestly could have happened even sooner. David Hall just moved the coin grading business model that he had come up with years before over to the burgeoning sports card hobby. I would agree with those that say it's all about the Benjamins and little if anything else, especially at this point. Do you REALLY need a PSA or an SGC to speculate on the authenticity, tamper-status, condition or condition nuances of your vintage card if you have been collecting and loving these things for 35 or 40 years? Well maybe you do, and I get the universal standard thing, but really? I don't. I laugh at anyone who thinks that the TPG's literally have any chance of knowing more about the cards you love in a 20-second-per evaluation than you do if you have been collecting for that long.

As for the complaints, who cares? PSA standards have waxed and waned - for decades. PSA's turn times and customer service quality have waxed and waned - for decades. The veritable laundry list of complaints against them have waxed and waned - for decades - in fact on this count, since they fraudulently slabbed their first card with the trimmed Gretzky Wagner.

Those who continue to buy into TPG's and prop them up - whatever their reason - to turn profits, or because they like the look or protection, or want to leave something easier to move in the marketplace for their descendants - these folks will always face the question of whether or not the BS and customer service issues are worth it. From my perspective, those questions and posts like this will likely never go away. It just depends on how much you are willing to put up with.

Disclaimer - I LOVE a properly graded SGC or PSA card in a nice looking slab. Don't get me wrong, it's a cool thing. But I left behind any notions of the infallibility of these type of companies a long time ago. Grading is subjective and always will be. The idea that it's not is a lemon they have sold to some of the collecting public and their bread and butter. Collect what you love. Buy the card not the grade. Buy the raw card and not the flawed slab. Do or do not do any of these things, whatever. In short - do whatever floats your boat!

I agree- there are millions of slabbed cards that aren't worth 10 cents. I collect cards, not slabs so it doesn't matter much to me. I only have a handful of graded cards, all vintage, because they were less expensive than raw in a similar grade.

What's going to happen to those millions of hot PSA 10 rookies when the player goes bust? Those cards where 2/3 of the graded are PSA 10? Maybe they'll be in the same place as the 1,000 count lots of Gregg Jefferies and Todd Van Poppel rookies that were going to make everyone rich.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by homerunderby

I agree- there are millions of slabbed cards that aren't worth 10 cents. I collect cards, not slabs so it doesn't matter much to me. I only have a handful of graded cards, all vintage, because they were less expensive than raw in a similar grade.

What's going to happen to those millions of hot PSA 10 rookies when the player goes bust? Those cards where 2/3 of the graded are PSA 10? Maybe they'll be in the same place as the 1,000 count lots of Gregg Jefferies and Todd Van Poppel rookies that were going to make everyone rich.

So true. Doesn't have to be bust--at the ridiculous prices they reach so fast all the player has to do is not be the new Mickey Mantle and the cards will fall. Or just break down early. Mike Trout hasn't played more than 140 games in a season since 2016. He is only 30 but already showing signs of breaking down.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Mike Trout hasn't played more than 140 games in a season since 2016. He is only 30 but already showing signs of breaking down.

While what you are saying isn't dead wrong, Trout is one of the worst examples to make a point in terms of players breaking down at that age. He's likely already a HOF'er by virtue of the stats he has garnered so far. If he plays until he's 40 with the same stats he's got now - he could be close to 700 home runs and who knows what his OPS and other numbers will be by then. But even if he trails off - very likely he still gets to 500 homers. Short of a Pete Rose or O.J. Simpson type situation off the field, I think he remains the marquee player of his era. Agree with you on falling if someone is not the next Mick - but if anyone is in this era - it's Trout.

I think the '11 US Trout is an anomaly anyway though just in terms of ultra modern hot rookies. Nobody else has done that, but of course Topps has gone even more SP and SSP and variation crazy in the last decade. But like why isn't the Juan Soto RC tearing it up the way the US Trout did?

[Dandor]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

While what you are saying isn't dead wrong, Trout is one of the worst examples to make a point in terms of players breaking down at that age. He's likely already a HOF'er by virtue of the stats he has garnered so far. If he plays until he's 40 with the same stats he's got now - he could be close to 700 home runs and who knows what his OPS and other numbers will be by then. But even if he trails off - very likely he still gets to 500 homers. Short of a Pete Rose or O.J. Simpson type situation off the field, I think he remains the marquee player of his era. Agree with you on falling if someone is not the next Mick - but if anyone is in this era - it's Trout.

No way he ends up with 700 or even 600 homeruns. He will be much closer to the 500 mark. I agree with even 500 homers and the advanced metrics we use, he is the iconic player of his generation. 7 years of winning the MVP or coming in second can't be overlooked. I think his career stats will look very much like Mantle's. He will be way short of the 3000 career hits, his batting average will fall under the .300 mark, and it will always be the "what if" he stayed healthy. However, just like Mantle he will have that collectability. The name Mike Trout right now means the best player in baseball. Stats be damned. Mickey Mantle broke down and he is more valued over Hank Aaron who accumulated ridiculous stats.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Dandor

No way he ends up with 700 or even 600 homeruns. He will be much closer to the 500 mark. I agree with even 500 homers and the advanced metrics we use, he is the iconic player of his generation.

I would agree it's an extreme long shot for him to reach those HR totals, just saying as of right now it's possible. Rare is the player like a Henry Aaron who can just continue busting out 30, 40 homers a year in his late 30's. Aaron just kept on going at that stage of his career where even like a Mays began to trail off earlier. Always kind of makes me cringe when people say things like "Well, he's a HOF'er now..." about anyone because of course who knows what can happen. My point was simply if anyone has it in the bag today, it's Trout. I'm sitting here looking at a '71 Topps Bench, on the back it says "A future Hall of Famer at 23." One of the instances where they were totally right of course, but you've got to imagine those kind of calls are wrong way more often than they are right.

[Tomi]

Statistically Pujols should have it "in the bag" , has all time numbers and should be way ahead of Trout in card prices per performance, but no. I think hype drives the market more than anything. Aaron Judges career numbers by age 30 are horrible, but he is collected as a future HOFer. Not saying Trout is hype, but his career numbers aren't really much (so far) compared to guys like Pujols and other all time greats.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Tomi

Statistically Pujols should have it "in the bag" , has all time numbers and should be way ahead of Trout in card prices per performance, but no. I think hype drives the market more than anything. Aaron Judges career numbers by age 30 are horrible, but he is collected as a future HOFer. Not saying Trout is hype, but his career numbers aren't really much (so far) compared to guys like Pujols and other all time greats.

Pujols is definitely undervalued. But is it really different than say, comparing the popularity of a Mantle to an underrated contemporary like Frank Robinson? Same with Trout, IMO.

Mantle isn't hype either, but due to circumstances like time and hobby popularity he's out of proportion anymore to many if not most of his contemporaries.