Walter Johnson or Christy Mathewson?

[Archive]

Posted By: Bryan Long

I rarely seem to be able to post anything these days. A lot is because I no longer have the time to collect much. I am, however, ready to jump back on the ship and start collecting cards again. Here is my problem: I have a very limited budget so my collection will also need to be very limited. So I have decided right now to only collect one player. The title says it all - should I collect Walter Johnson or Christy Mathewson cards? Both are my all-time favorite pre-war players. This may seem like a rather stupid post, but I thought it may be fun to hear everyone's opinion on this.
Thanks.

.

[Archive]

Posted By: boxingcardman

Johnson is a better choice. He was in more sets owing to a career that ran into the late 1920s and has fewer impossible cards.

Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc

[Archive]

Posted By: Michael C

Other than Cobb, Young, and Wagner, I would say you picked the two most expensive players.

I've always been partial to Mathewson, even though I don't have any of his cards. I've been drooling over his t205 card for years which I think is his best issue.

I've got just one Big Train:





Good luck with which ever player you choose.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bryan Long

I picked both of them. I know they are expensive as well, but if it is only one player I am ok with that. One HOFer is better than all of the HOFERs which is what I used to try and do. Walter Johnson was the player I had the most luck with in the past. Gee, it be nice to have those cards back.

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Sanders

Limit Matty to 1900-1915 and Big Train from 1915-1920's. That gives you most of their careers as prviously indicated and a finite population of cards to choose from. Then if you get the bug again Cobb from 1900-1920 and Ruth from 1920-1935- In other words choose the best player in their best years. You can go up and down history picking the best hitter and/or pitcher of their generation. Matty and Johnson overlap but not by much in terms of cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason L

honestly, I fancy Mathewson's cards more than Johnson's when considering the total populations, on average.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark L

Since I have an idiosyncratic preference for the National League, I would lean to Mathewson. On the other hand, life is too short to collect only one great pitcher. I would collect them both, along with Grover Cleveland Alexander

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

[Archive]

Posted By: steve

Or both - yes!

Maybe start with one of each. Buy the best quality you can afford. Shop around, and try to get some value - that always puts a smile on your face.

By the way, my late grandfather lived in Washington DC - said Johnson was the best pitcher he ever saw live and in person.

steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Bryan Long

I am starting to lean toward both after reading a few people's comments. I love the Johnson and matty t206 portrait cards and at one time had about 5 or 6 johnson portraits. If I remember correctly, I think Cristoff has a very nice Felix Mathewson that I saw a couple of years ago the national in Chicago. Ryan, you want to let that come my way to start off the collection?

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Phil Garry

Thet are so close that I would agree also that both would be the best idea if you can afford it.

[Archive]

Posted By: David

I would collect cards of both players. Just focus on the cards that you like rather then any of their cards. In case you have not seen it, here is the Felix Mendelsohn of Johnson.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bryan Long

David - that is a nice card indeed. Picking up only a couple of cards at a time will be the only way I go. Money is tuff these days! Both have great cards that can be had if you wait long enough and have the money to pull the trigger I have my eyes set on a johnson right now, but it is beginning to get beyond my reach.

.