What are the best vintage, investment-type players in your opinion?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

"If Mantle was black" is not a good argument, it's a tired argument.

Do you think he would have achieved the same mythical stature?

[Exhibitman]

I think we are overthinking this.

Mays's hobby status (card prices) would be closer to Mantle's if Mays was card #313 instead of card #261 in the 1952 Topps set. Mantle became iconic in the hobby in large part because of the legend of the last series of 1952 Topps: the mass retail returns, the garbage scow in the harbor, the Mr. Mint 'find', etc., until "the Mantle" (and you know when someone says it that way it is exactly what they mean) transcends the hobby itself, like the Wagner. From that base, the prices on every Mantle card get pushed higher much as every Wagner card gets pushed higher.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I think we are overthinking this.

Mays's hobby status (card prices) would be closer to Mantle's if Mays was card #313 instead of card #261 in the 1952 Topps set. Mantle became iconic in the hobby in large part because of the legend of the last series of 1952 Topps: the mass retail returns, the garbage scow in the harbor, the Mr. Mint 'find', etc., until "the Mantle" (and you know when someone says it that way it is exactly what they mean) transcends the hobby itself, like the Wagner. From that base, the prices on every Mantle card get pushed higher much as every Wagner card gets pushed higher.

Don't equivalent Mantle cards still outsell Mays pretty handily? Just to pick a few years, 56, 57, 58?

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Don't equivalent Mantle cards still outsell Mays pretty handily? Just to pick a few years, 56, 57, 58?

Yes, and I think Mantle 'awareness' due to the 1952 Topps is one of the factors that goes into driving overall Mantle prices, and I think it is a big one. I know it is flawed inductive reasoning, but we can eliminate many of the other factors that might otherwise explain it:

--As the stats guys have already argued, Mantle towers above other, better players in terms of overall card prices. There has to be a reason for Mantle's prominence that is not performance-based.

--Some of that is Yankees mystique, but not a lot of it. Joe DiMaggio has as much Yankee mystique as anyone, The Yankee Clipper, Mr. Marilyn Monroe, so why does Joe DiMaggio show up consistently in the undervalued lists?

--There is also an argument that the boomer generation with fond Mantle memories distorts the pricing curve. I get that boomers were the generation that kicked off the card collecting craze, and that they knew of Mantle through all of those post-season nationally-televised World Series appearances, but generations have never been the prime drivers of prices on the best cards. No one alive today saw Cobb or Wagner play; doesn't seem to have messed with their card prices.

--Race is a factor, I think, but a diminishing one as the more racist generations die out. I was born a generation after integration of the game, around the time Jim Crow was outlawed, and collectors my age idolized many black players: Aaron, Clemente, Gibson, Brock, etc. In my childhood group of white kids in NYC, for example, I was an Aaron fan and one of my best friends was a Clemente guy. I don't think race per se is a big factor in the value differences.

--I also have to cite hobby-related card behavior as a factor in the hobby's perceptions of these players. Mays was a dick at shows. Mantle wasn't. I know I was a Mays fan but dumped my Mays collection after 'meeting' the man at a show. I have to believe that there is some percentage of collectors who were similarly turned off by certain players at shows and other encounters.

[Peter_Spaeth]

You would have to be 65 or older to have a clear memory of Mantle playing, and even older to have a clear memory of him when he was still great. I wonder what percentage of purchases that generation is still responsible for?

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You would have to be 65 or older to have a clear memory of Mantle playing, and even older to have a clear memory of him when he was still great. I wonder what percentage of purchases that generation is still responsible for?

Check these out, Peter. These are the 2 oldest complete-game telecasts of major league baseball known to exist, games 6 and 7 of the 1952 World Series. You will see for yourself a youthful Mantle "when he was still great":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iN2VxjMMwf4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqZnPQnxO9U

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

--Some of that is Yankees mystique, but not a lot of it. Joe DiMaggio has as much Yankee mystique as anyone, The Yankee Clipper, Mr. Marilyn Monroe, so why does Joe DiMaggio show up consistently in the undervalued lists?

It is almost all this. There was a time when Mays and Mantle cards were the same price. The 1952 Topps Mantle was still one of the top 10 cards in the hobby and the 1953 Topps Mays was more valuable than the 1953 Topps Mantle.. A group of New York dealers started buying up Mantle cards driving up prices and creating demand. Mantle became the player to collect and new collectors entering the hobby since have been drawn to the player with the highest values.

DiMaggio is hurt by several factors. No Topps cards and a lack of cards overall. His career numbers were hurt by him being a right handed hitter in Yankee Stadium and missing 3 years to WWII. He only had 2241 hits and 361 HR.

Mantle on the other hand broke Babe Ruth's World Series HR record and was part of the 1961 HR chase. When he retired he was #3 all time in HRs behind Ruth and Mays. The collectors of this boom time remembered Mantle more than DiMaggio and chased his cards.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I'm not seeing how DiMaggio is "hurt." His cards seem to me to command very strong prices. I mean the vintage ones, not the dubious 90s autographs.

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I'm not seeing how DiMaggio is "hurt." His cards seem to me to command very strong prices. I mean the vintage ones, not the dubious 90s autographs.

Agreed. I think DiMaggio commands very strong prices overall as well. His cards are always going to have the Marilyn Monroe mystique, the 56-game hitting streak, "Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?"

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I think we are overthinking this.

Mays's hobby status (card prices) would be closer to Mantle's if Mays was card #313 instead of card #261 in the 1952 Topps set. Mantle became iconic in the hobby in large part because of the legend of the last series of 1952 Topps: the mass retail returns, the garbage scow in the harbor, the Mr. Mint 'find', etc., until "the Mantle" (and you know when someone says it that way it is exactly what they mean) transcends the hobby itself, like the Wagner. From that base, the prices on every Mantle card get pushed higher much as every Wagner card gets pushed higher.

You can test this theory by looking at 1953 Topps where the Mays is short printed and the Mantle is not.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Snowman

You can test this theory by looking at 1953 Topps where the Mays is short printed and the Mantle is not.

Not a good comparison. 1953 Topps does not have the following or the prestige of 1952 Topps. PSA puts it best:

"This set is regarded today as the "Holy Grail" of modern day cards, in fact it is often compared to T-206 White Borders and 1933 Goudey when the topic of conversation evolves around the greatest card set ever produced. As time goes by and new generations of collectors enter the hobby, the stature of the 1952 set continues to grow. The same can be said of card #311 Mickey Mantle, perhaps the most recognized card in the world today with the exception of the T-206 Wagner."

Also, a big price differential between Mantle and Mays in other sets would be in alignment with a theory that Mantle's hobby prestige is tied to the 1952 Topps high number story.

[Peter_Spaeth]

My sense is that for cards of about the same overall pop, in grades not considered tough, Mantles are 1.5-2x Mays in most cases. I have not researched that currently admittedly. I did look at just one example for the hell of it -- PSA 7 1958s -- and this seemed true.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Not a good comparison. 1953 Topps does not have the following or the prestige of 1952 Topps. PSA puts it best:

"This set is regarded today as the "Holy Grail" of modern day cards, in fact it is often compared to T-206 White Borders and 1933 Goudey when the topic of conversation evolves around the greatest card set ever produced. As time goes by and new generations of collectors enter the hobby, the stature of the 1952 set continues to grow. The same can be said of card #311 Mickey Mantle, perhaps the most recognized card in the world today with the exception of the T-206 Wagner."

Also, a big price differential between Mantle and Mays in other sets would be in alignment with a theory that Mantle's hobby prestige is tied to the 1952 Topps high number story.

So you're saying that you believe a major factor in Mantle being priced much higher than Mays is due to the 1952 Topps card itself and the fact that getting a Mantle was more difficult than getting a Mays and that this single difference in what is probably the most collected/coveted set in the hobby is at least in part responsible for the delta between Mantle and Mays and that it perpetuates across other sets?

I'm not sure I'd pitch my hat into that ring, but I suppose it's possible. I thought you were just saying that the only reason there was a difference between Mantle and Mays in the 52 set was because Mantle happened to be in the high number series and that if the two cards were swapped in that set that the Mays would be the more valuable card. I didn't realize you were also attributing their deltas in other sets back to that 52 set as well.

[packs]

I think Mantle is in the right place in the hobby. I haven't seen anyone explain why a Triple Crown winning, three time MVP and seven time World Series champion shouldn't be the toast of the hobby.

He accomplished an impossible feat. I'm sure there is another instance or two out there, but he took over for DiMaggio, already a huge Yankee legend and giant of the game. Mantle went on to be even better than he was.

Can anyone think of another instance where a torch was passed like the one from DiMaggio to Mantle? Who did Mays take over for? Who took over after him? How about Aaron?

Mantle was under immense pressure and it would have been easy for him to be Bobby Murcer, but instead he was Mickey Mantle.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

I think Mantle is in the right place in the hobby. I haven't seen anyone explain why a Triple Crown winning, three time MVP and seven time World Series champion shouldn't be the toast of the hobby.

He accomplished an impossible feat. I'm sure there is another instance or two out there, but he took over for DiMaggio, already a huge Yankee legend and giant of the game. Mantle went on to be even better than he was.

Can anyone think of another instance where a torch was passed like the one from DiMaggio to Mantle? Who did Mays take over for? Who took over after him? How about Aaron?

Mantle was under immense pressure and it would have been easy for him to be Bobby Murcer, but instead he was Mickey Mantle.

Not quite the same but Yaz and Williams.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by packs

I think Mantle is in the right place in the hobby. I haven't seen anyone explain why a Triple Crown winning, three time MVP and seven time World Series champion shouldn't be the toast of the hobby.

He accomplished an impossible feat. I'm sure there is another instance or two out there, but he took over for DiMaggio, already a huge Yankee legend and giant of the game. Mantle went on to be even better than he was.

Can anyone think of another instance where a torch was passed like the one from DiMaggio to Mantle? Who did Mays take over for? Who took over after him? How about Aaron?

Mantle was under immense pressure and it would have been easy for him to be Bobby Murcer, but instead he was Mickey Mantle.

Why would who played before or after someone affect their card prices?

I've never seen anyone pumping Jim Gilliam because he inherited Jackie Robinson's torch.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by packs

I think Mantle is in the right place in the hobby. I haven't seen anyone explain why a Triple Crown winning, three time MVP and seven time World Series champion shouldn't be the toast of the hobby.

Berra was a three time MVP and TEN time World Series champion, and he is nowhere near the toast of the hobby, value-wise.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Do you think he would have achieved the same mythical stature?

He achieved what he achieved,what if the sprinkler was set lower, what if he didn't have a drinking problem, what if his body wasn't prone to injury?

Didn't Mays achieve the same mythical stature? He did for me and many other collectors.

Is your issue that Mays rookie is cheaper than Mantle rookie? Who cares?

You're posting fantasy what ifs with racist undertones, yes, America was racist in the 50's, America is currently the least racist country in the world.

Can we please move forward and realize the dream of Martin Luther King?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

He achieved what he achieved,what if the sprinkler was set lower, what if he didn't have a drinking problem, what if his body wasn't prone to injury?

Didn't Mays achieve the same mythical stature? He did for me and many other collectors.

Is your issue that Mays rookie is cheaper than Mantle rookie? Who cares?

You're posting fantasy what ifs with racist undertones, yes, America was racist in the 50's, America is currently the least racist country in the world.

Can we please move forward and realize the dream of Martin Luther King?

Way back in this thread a guy asked a legitimate question why Mantle had the hobby status he did, given where he falls in terms of on field performance. I was simply trying to answer that question as best I could. You are raising a bunch of straw men, I have said nothing at all about present day America nor am I posting anything with racist undertones. Moving forward with Dr. King's vision does not mean not talking about racism particularly its historic impact.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Way back in this thread a guy asked a legitimate question why Mantle had the hobby status he did, given where he falls in terms of on field performance. I was simply trying to answer that question as best I could. You are raising a bunch of straw men, I have said nothing at all about present day America nor am I posting anything with racist undertones. Moving forward with Dr. King's vision does not mean not talking about racism particularly its historic impact.

Right, but you answered with the race card like that is relevant today in the world of card collecting.
Why does a certain segment of white society always have to bring race into every discussion?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Right, but you answered with the race card like that is relevant today in the world of card collecting.
Why does a certain segment of white society always have to bring race into every discussion?

I can't answer that question. I can only say that in my opinion, Mantle being white, at that time, was one of a number of factors in why he achieved the relative stature he did. That's all. The question was asked, and I volunteered an answer.

I could easily ask the question you put a different way. Why does a certain segment of white society avoid honest discussions about race?

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I can't answer that question. I can only say that in my opinion, Mantle being white, at that time, was one of a number of factors in why he achieved the relative stature he did. That's all. The question was asked, and I volunteered an answer.

I could easily ask the question you put a different way. Why does a certain segment of white society avoid honest discussions about race?

Because if all of our discussions lead with race like a certain segment of white society is prone to do we will never move forward as a nation.

Are you just as willing to call out the racist/sexist hate Catlyn Clark is receiving from the black/lesbian dominated WNBA?

[G1911]

Let's just assume that people pay more for Mantle because of his white skin.


Shall we call out that if Clemente was a white boy he wouldn't sell for as much and would be closer to Kaline?

Or that Robinson is valued mostly based on race?

In my little wing of the cigarette card boxing hobby it's pretty obvious that there is an explicit and constant race factor that values blacks significantly over whites.

Ali cards are worth a whole lot more as a shit-talking black muslim than if he was a shit-talking white christian.

Jack Johnson outsells Jim Jeffries, who had a far superior resume, by ~50X because of race.

Heck, check out Isaac Murphy's N162 vs. a white jockey. Why is he worth so, so much more?


I am sure we all feel equally troubled about these valuation differences.

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Because if all of our discussions lead with race like a certain segment of white society is prone to do we will never move forward as a nation.

Are you just as willing to call out the racist/sexist hate Catlyn Clark is receiving from the black/lesbian dominated WNBA?

Clark wasn't so much hated by players as just found annoying, and it had nothing to do with her skin color or sexual orientation. The issue with her was that she is a whiner and she was getting all the press at the beginning of the year while established stars were getting very little. I believe most felt that she had to earn the attention at the professional level not just be bestowed it for what she did in college. She is one of the top 10 players in the league which is great for a rookie, but it's a little premature to be starting the bust on Mount Rushmore.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Do you think he would have achieved the same mythical stature?

I'm not sure anyone can deny skin color generally played into public perception at the time but I don't think it had anything to do with Mantle becoming Mantle. There was so much more at play. He was taking over for Joe D and he didn't miss a beat. Mays wasn't stepping into shoes like that. Mantle deserves every accolade. What he did was next to impossible. How often does a player step into the shoes of someone like Joe D and plays even better than they did?

[mordecaibrown1]

Ruth
Wagner
Cobb
Joe Jackson
Mantle
Young
Mathewson
Gehrig
Johnson
Anson
Kelly
Mays
DiMaggio
Robinson
Williams

All depends on the card/set its from

[Yoda]

Back in the day, all the neighborhood kids (me, too, although I was a Dodgers fan) felt that while Willie was great, special even, Mickey was magic.

[Flintboy]

Two that come to mind as really undervalued are Bench’s rookie in PSA 8 or higher and Staubach in football. Staubach’s rook in an 8 right now is a steal. Especially when you compare it to Bradshaw…..