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

[uniship]

Curious your thoughts on the best players and or cards to invest in for vintage as of this time in our history September 2024.

Here’s my two cents - would love to hear yours.

Joe Jackson
Josh Gibson (what little there is)
Early Negro league players that were the first major league baseball players
Jackie Robinson lower pop cards
Ted Williams seems completely undervalued - But that has always been the case so take heed
Willie Mays and Hank Aaron also seem undervalued - But that is always been the case with them too in my opinion so might never change in our lifetime
1914 crackerjack cards and 1915 crackerjack cards (Not enough to go around)


Just a few that popped into my brain would love to hear your opinions. Thanks!

[Bagwell-1994]

It blows me away how strong and dare I say "over valued" Mickey Mantle has always been. I would love someone more knowledgeable to explain it. He was great, but not as great as numerous other players that are valued far less in collecting.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Peter_Spaeth]

Same answer I would always give: Ruth, Cobb and Mantle. The "undervalued" game is not worth playing IMO.

[gonefishin]

Maybe vintage Japanese cards. Of course I don't know, but as MLB studies their long-term plans to expand their international market I would think Japan would be at the top of the list. If true, the demand for Japanese cards would rise significantly. How much? Who knows. Take a look at how the landscape has changed since Ichiro came on board in 2001. Now with Ohtani, picture the landscape in 5 years.

Just a couple of thoughts.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Bagwell-1994

It blows me away how strong and dare I say "over valued" Mickey Mantle has always been. I would love someone more knowledgeable to explain it. He was great, but not as great as numerous other players that are valued far less in collecting.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Mantle is the perfect storm. Yankees. 50s. Sorry to say this, but white where Mays and Aaron -- both probably better players -- were not. Switch hitting and power/speed things. Folk hero personality and looks. Mystique of playing through pain. And, taking into account the astonishing number of walks, his metrics really are great.

[Bagwell-1994]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Mantle is the perfect storm. Yankees. 50s. Sorry to say this, but white where Mays and Aaron -- both probably better players -- were not. Switch hitting and power/speed things. Folk hero personality and looks. Mystique of playing through pain. And, taking into account the astonishing number of walks, his metrics really are great.

I suppose that explains it pretty well. Still puzzling to me though. Stan Musial, Teddy Ball Game, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron. Absolute studs of that era but they pale in comparison to the "Mystique of the Mick".

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Bagwell-1994

I suppose that explains it pretty well. Still puzzling to me though. Stan Musial, Teddy Ball Game, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron. Absolute studs of that era but they pale in comparison to the "Mystique of the Mick".

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Sometimes it’s not meant to make sense. The market takes on a life of its own, and people pay the piper because they can’t live without it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Bagwell-1994

I suppose that explains it pretty well. Still puzzling to me though. Stan Musial, Teddy Ball Game, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron. Absolute studs of that era but they pale in comparison to the "Mystique of the Mick".

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Look at Joe Namath in football. Pete Maravich in basketball. Popularity can be fueled by intangibles.

Conversely there are lots of players who just don't generate as much excitement as their numbers would suggest. But don't fall into the "underrated" trap -- it's not like after decades, that's going to suddenly change.

[ClementeFanOh]

Uniship/Eric-

Interesting question for those who stay on the topic. It seems like you are
well aware of all the obvious individual players and were maybe looking for
some "under the radar" good bets. The 1914/15 CJs are a great start. I'd also
go with the tougher 19th century HOFers in the Old Judge set, and other
even tougher issues, as supply/demand takes hold. Just a guess

Trent King

[Rhotchkiss]

I claim ignorance on pre 1900.

The inaugural 5:

Cobb
Wagner
Ruth
Mathewson
Johnson

Cy Young
Joe Jackson
Jackie Robinson
Mantle
Mays

Thorpe

Sets - t206, 1914 CJ, E107, T3, E94, W600, Rose Co

Undervalued cards, IMO

T204 Johnson
Tip Top Wagner
1925 Exhibits Gehrig
Dietsche Cobb, throwing and batting

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Bagwell-1994

It blows me away how strong and dare I say "over valued" Mickey Mantle has always been. I would love someone more knowledgeable to explain it. He was great, but not as great as numerous other players that are valued far less in collecting.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

New York is a big market. Yankees have a lot of fans. Fans overvalue playoff performance. Mantle won a lot, and played great (18 WS HRs) during an era when there were no playoffs to navigate through because the winners of the AL and NL went straight to the World Series. He's been a hobby legend ever since.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by gonefishin

Maybe vintage Japanese cards. Of course I don't know, but as MLB studies their long-term plans to expand their international market I would think Japan would be at the top of the list. If true, the demand for Japanese cards would rise significantly. How much? Who knows. Take a look at how the landscape has changed since Ichiro came on board in 2001. Now with Ohtani, picture the landscape in 5 years.

Just a couple of thoughts.

Shhhh

[Snowman]

As much as I love doing it myself, and cannot follow my own advise, I would tell someone to avoid set building is they want to collect as an investment long term. Younger generations simply don't care about it. The hobby has changed. I wouldn't buy T206 commons, that's for sure.

Focus on tier 1 MLB players and Negro League stars. And focus on the best eye appeal examples you can find. Avoid lower tier HOFers and commons.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Mantle is the perfect storm. Yankees. 50s. Sorry to say this, but white where Mays and Aaron -- both probably better players -- were not. Switch hitting and power/speed things. Folk hero personality and looks. Mystique of playing through pain. And, taking into account the astonishing number of walks, his metrics really are great.

You said it in a nutshell; this explains it probably better than anyone else.

[Exhibitman]

Ideally, Babe Ruth, Jackie Robinson, certain Mantle cards (e.g., 1951B, 1952T), certain cards of top tier HOFers, some key RCs (e.g., Aaron, Mays, Koufax, etc.), Anything of the foregoing players in rare types, so you can set your price when you want to sell.

[Beercan collector]

Turning this into a Mantle appreciation , but who was a dangerous switch hitter before he came along ? Ripper Collins ? Roger Connor ?
And even after he retired there was nobody til Eddie Murray (249th on the OPS list)
(And yeah I looked it up)

[MVSNYC]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I claim ignorance on pre 1900.

The inaugural 5:

Cobb
Wagner
Ruth
Mathewson
Johnson

Cy Young
Joe Jackson
Jackie Robinson
Mantle
Mays

Thorpe

Sets - t206, 1914 CJ, E107, T3, E94, W600, Rose Co

Undervalued cards, IMO

T204 Johnson
Tip Top Wagner
1925 Exhibits Gehrig
Dietsche Cobb, throwing and batting

+1

Good list, Ryan.

[rats60]

Ruth
Wagner
Cobb
Joe Jackson

[JollyElm]

Every city has an altar on which the great local players are put and worshipped as gods, but the golden New York shrine is just soooooooooo much higher than any other one in the world.

[lumberjack]

Well, start with the word "rookie" attached to any great player. Rookie card, rookie photo, rookie jersey, rookie glove....You get the idea.

[oldjudge]

Pre-1900 Buck Ewing, John Ward, Ed Delahanty, Albert Spalding
Post 1900. Thorpe, Alexander, DiMaggio

[Yoda]

I was fortunate enough to live in the New York area growing up in the 50's and see many games with my Dad at Ebbets, Polo Grounds or the old Yankee Stadium.
To understand Mickey's Zeus-like status, you had to see him play, which I did. He had a certain mystique; grace in the field, roaming center field, and when he came to bat, the crowd hushed in anticipation of might happen. I still can remember when he hit 2 HR, one from each side of the plate against the Indians.
How any of this translates to his card values, I am unsure, but he sure was something special.

[bmattioli]

Originally Posted by Bagwell-1994

It blows me away how strong and dare I say "over valued" Mickey Mantle has always been. I would love someone more knowledgeable to explain it. He was great, but not as great as numerous other players that are valued far less in collecting.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Living on the East Coast 60's-80's then Military Service through 1994 then back to East Coast until now, Mickey Mantle is loved by all. Huge Redsox fans including myself loved the player and idolized him. Grown men cried when he died. He was well loved by all..

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Mantle is the perfect storm. Yankees. 50s. Sorry to say this, but white where Mays and Aaron -- both probably better players -- were not. Switch hitting and power/speed things. Folk hero personality and looks. Mystique of playing through pain. And, taking into account the astonishing number of walks, his metrics really are great.

While racism was surely more prominent back then, I don't think it's necessary to describe the delta between his prices and other black stars of his day. As someone else pointed out earlier, Stan Musial and Ted Williams were every bit as good as Mantle, and they were white as well. But their prices are below even Mays and Aaron. I think the Yankees factor and World Series performances are sufficient to explain the delta. That and he was well-liked in general. I suppose you could argue that a black athlete may not have had access to the same media privileges that Mantle was given, so in that way it was more challenging for them to build up a fan base, and that by extension having that larger fan base is what allowed his legacy to flourish as well as it has? I don't know. But that feels like a stretch to me. Jackie Robinson and Willie Mays both had plenty of access to the media as well.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

While racism was surely more prominent back then, I don't think it's necessary to describe the delta between his prices and other black stars of his day. As someone else pointed out earlier, Stan Musial and Ted Williams were every bit as good as Mantle, and they were white as well. But their prices are below even Mays and Aaron. I think the Yankees factor and World Series performances are sufficient to explain the delta. That and he was well-liked in general. I suppose you could argue that a black athlete may not have had access to the same media privileges that Mantle was given, so in that way it was more challenging for them to build up a fan base, and that by extension having that larger fan base is what allowed his legacy to flourish as well as it has? I don't know. But that feels like a stretch to me. Jackie Robinson and Willie Mays both had plenty of access to the media as well.

IMO it's one of many factors, not the sole determinant. But my best guess would be that if Mantle had been Black, it would not have turned out the same for him in the context of his time.

[BioCRN]

Nuances of race and his peers aside, was there anyone with a fist full of cash that Mantle would say "no" to when it came time to ask him to pitch a product?

Dude had crazy mainstream coverage pushing a wide variety of everything.

Bread, photo film, cigarettes, quitting smoking programs, hotdogs, watches, etc etc...beer, obviously...

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

IMO it's one of many factors, not the sole determinant. But my best guess would be that if Mantle had been Black, it would not have turned out the same for him in the context of his time.

I think it's safe to say, baseball card collectors in today's world care nothing about the color of ones skin.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

I think it's safe to say, baseball card collectors in today's world care nothing about the color of ones skin.

I agree, and of course that is as it should be, but we are now taking as a given Mantle's status as the most iconic post-war player, maybe ever, which to some extent has been handed down. So I don't think we're saying different things. If the hobby collectively had a completely clean slate to write on, does it still really rank Mantle above (far above) everyone else?

I grew up in the 60s. It was a given that Mantle was godlike. My friends and I loved Mays too, but it wasn't the same. You opened packs wanting Mantle above everyone else. To a large extent that engrained thinking lives on.

[Kutcher55]

Yastrzemski.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I agree, and of course that is as it should be, but we are now taking as a given Mantle's status as the most iconic post-war player, maybe ever, which to some extent has been handed down. So I don't think we're saying different things. If the hobby collectively had a completely clean slate to write on, does it still really rank Mantle above (far above) everyone else?

I grew up in the 60s. It was a given that Mantle was godlike. To a large extent that engrained thinking lives on.

I'm a West Coast guy, to me Willie Mays is the greatest post war player and along with Cobb is arguably the GOAT. That's why I own a Mays rookie and not a Mantle rookie, I'll buy a 51B Mantle at some point but it's pretty far down the list. But that has nothing to do with ones skin pigment.

Personally, I think the race argument is tired and outdated.

If somebody likes Mantle more than me, great, I'm a Mays guy. Who cares what the color of their skin was when it comes to collecting baseball cards.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

I'm a West Coast guy, to me Willie Mays is the greatest post war player and along with Cobb is arguably the GOAT. That's why I own a Mays rookie and not a Mantle rookie, I'll buy a 51B Mantle at some point but it's pretty far down the list. But that has nothing to do with ones skin pigment.

Personally, I think the race argument is tired and outdated.

If somebody likes Mantle more than me, great, I'm a Mays guy. Who cares what the color of their skin was when it comes to collecting baseball cards.

Again, you're right now, but my point is that there is a historical aspect to Mantle's transcendence that lives on today and as much as we would like to pretend race was just as irrelevant back then, I don't think it was. And again, I am not saying the only reason people elevated Mantle above everyone else is that he's white, not at all.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Again, you're right now, but my point is that there is a historical aspect to Mantle's transcendence that lives on today and as much as we would like to pretend race was just as irrelevant back then, I don't think it was. And again, I am not saying the only reason people elevated Mantle above everyone else is that he's white, not at all.

Race was relevant back then, it's not now.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Race was relevant back then, it's not now.

You're missing my point entirely. It's OK maybe I am not communicating it.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You're missing my point entirely. It's OK maybe I am not communicating it.

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

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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?

[robw1959]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Look at Joe Namath in football. Pete Maravich in basketball. Popularity can be fueled by intangibles.

Conversely there are lots of players who just don't generate as much excitement as their numbers would suggest. But don't fall into the "underrated" trap -- it's not like after decades, that's going to suddenly change.

Pretty good point here. And speaking of Namath, is there anyone more overrated in the realm of vintage card prices? I mean, come on . . . Joe Namath. The guy had more interceptions than touchdowns. Once again, it's the New York media factor.

[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.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You're missing my point entirely. It's OK maybe I am not communicating it.

I'll make it for you...

Peter is saying that Mantle likely benefited from being white, or had what many now refer to as "white privilege" in that had he been black, he may not have had the social impact that he did as a star white athlete. Perhaps he wouldn't have had as many endorsement deals or been on as many late-night talk shows, etc. Not because those promoting him were being actively racist, but rather just because they simply chose the star white guy because they thought he would be able to better connect with their customers or target audience. Surely his social persona helped to build his brand, and it is largely that brand that still lives on. That brand also contributes partially to the value of his cards even to this day.

There may be some truth to that viewpoint, I don't know. I wasn't around yet. But it is certainly plausible that had Mantle been black, he might not have had as many opportunities to build his brand and market himself to the extent that he did.

[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.

[jackwesq]

Originally Posted by Bagwell-1994

I suppose that explains it pretty well. Still puzzling to me though. Stan Musial, Teddy Ball Game, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron. Absolute studs of that era but they pale in comparison to the "Mystique of the Mick".

Combined, Ted Williams, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron and Stan Musial played in a total of 64 World Series games and had a total of 237 at bats / 267 plate appearances.

Mickey Mantle played in a total of 65 World Series games and had a total of 230 at bats / 273 plate appearances.

I'm sure that added to the Mystique of the Mick.

[Bagwell-1994]

Originally Posted by jackwesq

Combined, Ted Williams, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron and Stan Musial played in a total of 64 World Series games and had a total of 237 at bats / 267 plate appearances.



Mickey Mantle played in a total of 65 World Series games and had a total of 230 at bats / 273 plate appearances.



I'm sure that added to the Mystique of the Mick.

Duly noted. I think everyone had hammered the points home 10 fold! Makes me want to do a deep dive on Mick now. I honestly didn't know a whole lot about him.

O.P. I apologize for inadvertently helping to turn this thread into a Mantle biography.

My original post point was: Mantle is one of, if not the best, value investments for collectors.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[iwantitiwinit]

Pretty simple. Chase scarcity and or sets with achievable numbers of subjects. E cards. E93, E95, E103, etc.

[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?