Does anyone actually like the 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle?

[Bigdaddy]

Originally Posted by skelly423

Will this card still hold its hobby status after the generation that has living memory of the Mick dies off and we're left with just the numbers and a few grainy videos?

I think that question has already been answered by Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Joe Jackson and Christy Mathewson among others.

As far as the set and the Mick individually, the '52T set planted the flag for post war cards. Most mainstream releases since then are based on the '52 set design elements of that release - dimensional proportions, team logo, player's name, border, signature, color photo, stats and writeup. And as far as the Mick, I'd say he is second only to Ruth as far as collectability. Show me a player that more prevalent on the b/s/t boards than Mickey.

For me personally, it's not my favorite Mick card, but it is the white whale that I will pursue.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

I think that question has already been answered by Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Joe Jackson and Christy Mathewson among others.

Thank God someone surfaced with this ironclad logic, so I did't have to type it for the umpteenth time. The notion that interest will die over time is so specious and reductive and rears its head every now and then on these boards and others. When someone advances that theory, do they even bother to take a beat and think about Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Ty Cobb, and Shoeless Joe cards? And frankly while I LOVE all of those players and LOVE their cards, one could argue the 52 Mantle is more popular than any of them— so if demand and prices for their cards endures today, the Mantle's surely will.

This is also worth flagging: "The argument for owning a Mantle seems to be based on the circular reasoning that the prices for the Mantle will always go up because "they've always gone up".

Who says that is the reason Mantle owners own a Mantle? I and many owners I know could not give a rat's ass if the price halves or doubles. In fact, as a COLLECTOR I wish all my cards would halve so I could buy new stuff without having to sell anything. I bought my Mantle because I revere the player, the humanity of the man in the end of his life, baseball card history, the look of the card, the team, the card as a symbol of baseball and the Yankees and America in that era... notice nowhere in my list of reasons for owning the card is the presumption above— that its price will go up. And I can speak for too many collectors I know to list here that their reasons for owning one also do not include its future price. Besides, if one buys never intending to sell in their lifetime, who cares what the price is? That money will never be seen.

Also, when Louisville Slugger is putting a 52T Mantle as the headliner of its Museum Exhibits in our time today, that is further powerful proof of how the card will endure. Here's a video for the one or two people out there who don't realize that people of all ages are exposed to this card and its status today, below. I believe both Fogel's and Kendrick's Mantles have also been on Museum display for people of all ages recently. Not to mention the press on the PSA 9 sale.

LINK:

Mantle On News At Museum

[irv]

And this one just ended.
https://www.ebay.ca/itm/394160501784...&segname=11010

Still a healthy price as far as I know?

[MattyC]

For that degree of off centering and tilt, indeed a strong price. The premium for that card when the centering is there is exponential. Recent prices include 180k for an SGC 5 that was prettier than a PSA 5 that sold at the same time for 156k. Both were superior in eye appeal to that PSA 5 that sold for 124k. A PSA 3 that looked better than all of them sold for 163k at Heritage. Goldin also just sold a very low eye appeal 1 for $36,000.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Thank God someone surfaced with this ironclad logic, so I did't have to type it for the umpteenth time. The notion that interest will die over time is so specious and reductive and rears its head every now and then on these boards and others. When someone advances that theory, do they even bother to take a beat and think about Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Ty Cobb, and Shoeless Joe cards? And frankly while I LOVE all of those players and LOVE their cards, one could argue the 52 Mantle is more popular than any of them— so if demand and prices for their cards endures today, the Mantle's surely will.

This is also worth flagging: "The argument for owning a Mantle seems to be based on the circular reasoning that the prices for the Mantle will always go up because "they've always gone up".

Who says that is the reason Mantle owners own a Mantle? I and many owners I know could not give a rat's ass if the price halves or doubles. In fact, as a COLLECTOR I wish all my cards would halve so I could buy new stuff without having to sell anything. I bought my Mantle because I revere the player, the humanity of the man in the end of his life, baseball card history, the look of the card, the team, the card as a symbol of baseball and the Yankees and America in that era... notice nowhere in my list of reasons for owning the card is the presumption above— that its price will go up. And I can speak for too many collectors I know to list here that their reasons for owning one also do not include its future price. Besides, if one buys never intending to sell in their lifetime, who cares what the price is? That money will never be seen.

Also, when Louisville Slugger is putting a 52T Mantle as the headliner of its Museum Exhibits in our time today, that is further powerful proof of how the card will endure. Here's a video for the one or two people out there who don't realize that people of all ages are exposed to this card and its status today, below. I believe both Fogel's and Kendrick's Mantles have also been on Museum display for people of all ages recently. Not to mention the press on the PSA 9 sale.

LINK:

Mantle On News At Museum

As I've said many times, Mantle was a perfect storm of factors contributing to his popularity. Center fielder on the New York Yankees in their greatest era is a good start. All the pennants and WS and post-season home runs. The unprecedented switch-hitting power. The tape measure home runs. The blond folk hero personality. The mystique of overcoming injuries. A great player, better than most people assess him if you consider all the times he reached on walks, and then magnified by all the intangibles. Even his name is a bit magical. His stature will endure, IMO.

[frankbmd]

......and he followed in the footsteps of Mr. Mouse.

[ALR-bishop]

Admit it Matt, you somewhat enjoy debasing yourself in these Mantle discussions

[bobsbbcards]

Yes, from the not as clear minority.

[JustinD]

I really don't hate it, I just don't really appreciate it as much as the dictated value. I feel that's the large misunderstanding here.

If using my own money, I would much rather have a Basquiat than a Monet or Renoir. That does not devalue the latter, it just makes it not my preference.

It's also a disservice to state the common, "People who say this always seem to not have one". (Not picking on you Al. ) As that statement is certainly a logical fallacy, as it is truly stating jealously or envy as the intent. A more logical statement would be that if someone does not appreciate it they will likely have their eggs in a basket they more appreciate.

In my mind, it just is most likely never going to be at a price point that equals my appreciation of it and just will more than likely never own one at any income level as other items will shine above at that price. That statement does not devalue the item in real life, it is actually stating that it will remain valuable.