Most undervalued HOFers

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by SAllen2556

For pre-war I think players who starred in the 1920's are undervalued because there was no really popular card sets produced then. I'd include Harry Heilmann as one of those guys because he doesn't have a T206 or a Goudey card. In fact, I wonder how many hall-of-famers from that era don't have a card in either of those sets? Maybe Heilmann is the only one.

There are several HOFers where nobody seems to care. Heilmann has always been one of them. Same with someone like Al Simmons. I have never in my life run into a single collector who specializes in either, although you have to imagine they're out there somewhere.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

There are several HOFers where nobody seems to care. Heilmann has always been one of them. Same with someone like Al Simmons. I have never in my life run into a single collector who specializes in either, although you have to imagine they're out there somewhere.

Although he probably rates much higher than either of these two, you don't see a lot of people talking about their Jimmie Foxx cards either.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Although he probably rates much higher than either of these two, you don't see a lot of people talking about their Jimmie Foxx cards either.

Very true. And that's a real head-scratcher to me.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Although he probably rates much higher than either of these two, you don't see a lot of people talking about their Jimmie Foxx cards either.

Had I any Jimmie Foxx cards, I'd be bragging about those every day on this forum. The best I can do though among the vulpine crew is Nellie Fox.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I would bet that's the first appearance of "vulpine" on this forum.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Yes, we can add it to my record of being the first to use the term "jazz hands" on the forum nearly 20 years ago.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I would bet that's the first appearance of "vulpine" on this forum.

For consideration...

Vulpinnacle
The most perfect looking Nellie Fox or Jimmie Foxx card a collector could hope to find.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

For consideration...

Vulpinnacle
The most perfect looking Nellie Fox or Jimmie Foxx card a collector could hope to find.

It's gonna be REAL tough for you to match the genius of Lance ARF-strong.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I would bet that's the first appearance of "vulpine" on this forum.

Never doubt Frank's vocabulary.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showpo...8&postcount=14

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

Never doubt Frank's vocabulary.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showpo...8&postcount=14

Steven, I'm stupefied by your post, and even more dumbfounded if you used the Net54 search engine to discover and "out" my initial "vulpine" reference. My hope was that it would last in perpetuity hidden in the Archives of this forum. Your post nevertheless was kind and I thank you for it.

[G1911]

The primary job of a pitcher is to give up as few runs as possible so that his team has the best job of winning. Ryan was 12% better than the league at this. League average is a real definable thing, unlike a fictional replacement pitcher that was completely made up. This is a poor effectiveness at the primary job of a pitcher in a HOF context. There are a few guys lower, mostly bad selections or big compilers like Sutton.

Of course, Ryan is a deserving HOFer because he pitched a ridiculous number of innings, 12% over league while hurling 5,400 innings adds up to a heck of a valuable career.

The Ryan mythos is based on selective memory of his highlight reel + emotion rather than anything to do with overall effectiveness. Striking out tons of people and then walking in runs doesn't really help a team anymore than a more conventional stat line that adds up to the same run performance. People can value whatever they want, highlight reel guys tend to be more popular than math guys. Math people know Perry and Ryan are pretty similar, and so if one values guys whose measurable overall performance can be had at much lower prices (like the OP question), guys like Gaylord are undervalued (except his 66, my favorite of his cards) and guys like Nolan are overvalued.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The longevity, and the fact that he maintained his blazing fastball and no hit capability well into his 40s, are certainly part of the Ryan mystique too -- and harder to measure. In fact, if memory serves, his hobby icon status really happened in his last few years, is that right?

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by G1911

highlight reel guys tend to be more popular than math guys.

Sports are designed to entertain the masses, first and foremost. There would be no money and no jobs otherwise. So yes, highlight reel guys are tremendous assets for everybody who makes their living in the industry. I'm not trying to be patronizing by stating the obvious.

I guess I'll just never fail to be perplexed and bothered by how down a lot of people are on Nolan Ryan on various internet forums. I don't feel it's deserved. There are so many different types of players who offer their brand of talent to the game. One's skill set may differ radically from another, yet each is an asset. As others have stated, I also condsier Ryan among the greatest pitchers, but for different reasons than different types of pitchers. He had his own way of doing things and it clearly worked out for him.