Thoughts on having game used bats autographed

[markf31]

Maybe this just comes down to personal preference, but what are your thoughts about getting vintage game used bats autographed.

[MGHPro]

It is a personal preference, but I like them signed and inscribed. I would avoid a guy like Musial whose signature is just awful now and IMO would ruin the bat.

[old13man]

My personal preference is to leave vintage bats alone because they are rare. I get modern game used bats signed because they seem to be much more plentiful.

CJ

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by MGHPro

It is a personal preference, but I like them signed and inscribed. I would avoid a guy like Musial whose signature is just awful now and IMO would ruin the bat.

I agree with Matt, but the bats that I own are all post 1967, not earlier, FWIW.

[drc]

From having listened to many game used collectors, it's personal preference. Some like their items signed and some don't. With modern stuff more collectors like signed.

I know of one or two game used collectors who have removed authentic signatures from their items.

[bobbvc]

This has always been one of my favorite autographs on a bat. I got this in 1979 in Yuma Az. at Padres Spring Training. Maler was a rookie (pre actually) with the Mariners. He and Tito Nanni were taking extra bp on one of the fields at the complex. Maler broke this bat and gave it to me. Nanni broke his and gave it to my friend. I love how Maler almost duplicated his own signature on this bat. He had a good time giving it away. Could care less how it effects it's value. I've had it since, not for sale.

[MVSNYC]

i think modern bats are fine autographed and look nice...for vintage bats, i'd rather have them pure and left in "as-in" condition. i have a Mantle gamer from 1955-58, it's unsigned and i am glad it's that way. seems more mythical & nostalgic unsigned. on the flip side, i have a great black Jeter gamer from 2001-03, it's signed in silver sharpie and looks fantastic.