Willie McCovey -- underrated and undervalued?

[bk400]

Been looking at Willie McCovey's stats and record as a player...and trying to understand why his 1960 rookie card appears undervalued relative to his accomplishments as a player...Is it because he played in Mays's shadow? Or is there some supply side issue with his cards?

As an aside, there is so much comp data out there on cards, but none of it is organized properly...

[D. Bergin]

Mays shadow, mostly a 1st baseman, only 8 postseason games in his career (though he performed admirably in them), missed a lot of games in the 2nd half of his career, which depressed a lot of his still impressive counting stats.

Their career arcs are a bit different, but I see him as kind of a National League version of Harmon Killebrew. Both as players and how collectors see them as far as collectability.

[bk400]

Interesting comparison, indeed. The pricing on their mid-grade cards seems broadly similar as well. Seems like there's a bit more trades happening recently in the McCoveys, but neither card seems to have appreciated more than the market in recently years.

[jchcollins]

Remember the hobby works differently even from being a fan of the game. McCovey is seen as being in Mays' shadow in the hobby. In reality, SF the fans seemed to respect Mays - but they LOVED McCovey. It's always been strange to me how this translates or doesn't into card values.

Will agree with you on the whole that in the hobby McCovey fits in with other players like Yaz, Frank Robinson, Stan Musial, and there are a ton of pitchers - Carlton, Seaver, Palmer, etc. - who in comparison to the few "GOATS" of their era - don't get much hobby love or have cards that get really valuable outside of high end examples of their rookie cards.

[bk400]

Yes, Frank Robinson is another one that I don't really understand. His 1957 Topps rookie cards have appreciated well in the past 12-24 months, but they seem undervalued relative to their population when compared with guys like Mays.

[Beercan collector]

Also Eddie Matthews cards from the 60s are almost treated as commons

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Remember the hobby works differently even from being a fan of the game. McCovey is seen as being in Mays' shadow in the hobby. In reality, SF the fans seemed to respect Mays - but they LOVED McCovey. It's always been strange to me how this translates or doesn't into card values.

Will agree with you on the whole that in the hobby McCovey fits in with other players like Yaz, Frank Robinson, Stan Musial, and there are a ton of pitchers - Carlton, Seaver, Palmer, etc. - who in comparison to the few "GOATS" of their era - don't get much hobby love or have cards that get really valuable outside of high end examples of their rookie cards.

John, Thanks for the insight on what the fans thought of Willie McCovey. Just a quiet, no fuss, no showboat guy who was in Willie Mays's shadow. I'm not surprised the Frisco fans really loved Mr. McCovey. I well remember in the late 60s watching an episode of THE DATING GAME, and Willie was one of the contestants. The attractive gal chose somebody else to "date", and I think Willie's quiet, modest answers caused him to be ignored by the bachelorette. If you recall, the audience/TV viewers could see the contestants, but the girl could only hear their answers. After she made her selection, the host, Jim Lange, introduced the two rejected contestants. I think when she saw the tall, handsome Mr. McCovey, she quickly regretted her choice and desired Willie.

Ya win some. Ya lose some.

bk400-------When I would get McCovey in a Topps wax pack, I was pleased. I knew who he was, and I respected his numbers. Just like Frank Robinson, Stan Musial, Yaz, Carlton, Palmer, Gibson, Brock, Kaline, Rose et al.

But, when I got Mickey Mantle, it made my day, and my collecting year! By FAR!!!! On a lesser tier, I thought a lot of getting Ernie Banks, my favorite player, but I lived in the suburbs of Chicago. I was genuinely excited to get Tom Seaver though; I really admired him early on, and more so after 1969.

As collectors will school you, it's not the stats alone. Not by a long shot. You'd have collectors every once in a while whine and lament about how the cards of their guy were undervalued compared to ..... Certain players just have massive followings, and that's just the way it is. At least you'll be able to get the pick of the McCoveys you want.

Except for one. There's a Willie McCovey card I want real bad, and I won't tell you which one it is, 'cause I don't want more competition for it. I will kindly give you a hint---it's not an easy-weezie Topps mainstream gum card.
Have fun collecting "STRETCH". I just now read Willie's SABR entry. Good reading. I can see why you love McCovey; the more you get to know about him, the more you like him. --- Brian Powell

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by bk400

Been looking at Willie McCovey's stats and record as a player...and trying to understand why his 1960 rookie card appears undervalued relative to his accomplishments as a player...Is it because he played in Mays's shadow? Or is there some supply side issue with his cards?

As an aside, there is so much comp data out there on cards, but none of it is organized properly...

I think a lot of it is supply. There are almost 5K graded by PSA, another 1,500 by SGC and probably another 5K raw at least (I have a raw one).

You see Yaz's rookie from the same year go for more than than McCovey's. PSA 5's of Mccovey go for ~$175 and PSA 5s for Yaz's ~$275.

But Yaz won the triple crown.

I do think McCovey is underrated, even with the large supply of his Rookie out there. He was one of the most feared hitters of all-time. Led the League in HRs 3x and was intentionally walked an absurd 45x in 1969, the most anyone had ever been walked at that point.

Part of the problem was that he was battling Cepeda for playing time early in his career. From 1959 to 1962, McCovey averaged just 88 games per season, even though he hit .283/.369/.539 over that span.

In his first full season in 1963 he led the League with 44 HRs.

But he couldn't stay healthy, and played a lot of time through agony.

Supposedly Bill James once said McCovey could have it 800 HRs if his luck was better.

[JollyElm]

This video from The National is kind of funny (or more precisely, is right on point):
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?&...SC4&ajaxhist=0

The guy is looking through a stack of 1960 HOF rookie cards, when he arrives at the Yaz followed by McCovey. What he does/doesn't do is the visual equivalent of what's been said in this thread. Go to the 16:00 mark...

[bk400]

Brian1961 -- Thanks for taking the time to write such a comprehensive response. Very interesting insights. Trying to figure out which McCovey you covet...

That video from National was really telling. Not to spend too much time on the modern cards, but judging from that (anecdotal) collector reaction, one can see a situation 50 years from now where there is almost zero interest in any of Mike Trout's or Miguel Cabrera's myriad rookie cards.

[JollyElm]

He studied both of the Yazes (is that the plural of Yaz?) and ended up putting one aside to purchase. The next card was McCovey and he didn't even hesitate as he whipped right by it. Gone in a flash. We have no context, of course, maybe he's a Yaz collector, but wow...no respect.

[Kutcher55]

Well one anecdote is nice and all. Yaz had a better career than McCovey. Not by a lot - Yaz was more of a compiler. McCovey might have been a more fearsome hitter but Yaz was a better all around player. Plus he had ‘67. Their rookie cards and other cards from the 60s are priced accordingly. Over the years McCovey has actually closed the gap. Years ago his RC was worth a pittance compared to Yaz’s.

Anyway both great players and deserving first ballot HOFers.

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by bk400

one can see a situation 50 years from now where there is almost zero interest in any of Mike Trout's or Miguel Cabrera's myriad rookie cards.

Yep, remanded to a 5000 count box with Lars Nootbaar and King Tuck rookies.


I think the 1960 Topps issue hurts the value of McCovey's rookie card. I think most fans consider him a great player and a name that they recognize.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Yep, remanded to a 5000 count box with Lars Nootbaar and King Tuck rookies.


I think the 1960 Topps issue hurts the value of McCovey's rookie card. I think most fans consider him a great player and a name that they recognize.

Agreed, the 1960 card is not very attractive, the 61 on the other hand is a thing of beauty.