Who are the most "over-valued" players

[darkhorse9]

Over-priced would have been a wrong word since price is determined by demand. But in that vein, what pre-war players generally come with a higher value than their actual accomplishments on the field.

Not saying they're bad player, but they cost more to acquire than similar talent players. I'm not talking about a single card either. This applies to all cards of that player.

My first thought is Hank Greenberg. He brings a significant premium over players like Charlie Gehringer or even Mel Ott. He legend as a Jewish player certainly aids demand. But based on skills alone he shouldn't be that much higher.

Notoriety always helps too. Moe Berg is valued high because of his "off the playing field" notoriety.

What other players bring an excess of premium to their cards?

[BobbyStrawberry]

The Black Sox players come to mind.

[packs]

Personally I think Greenberg is extremely undervalued. He has a career OPS over 1.000 and a career OPS+ of 159 while missing his monster prime years.

I think the 19th century HOFers in the Old Judge set are over valued. The OJ set will always have a wow factor because of its age and size, but the players just weren't very good all things considered. I can believe that Hoss Radbourn was the elite pitcher of his time, but anyone winning 60 games in a season isn't playing a game we would recognize.

[raulus]

The obvious answer has to start with the 2 most notorious and expensive cards in the hobby:

Wagner
Mantle

Allow me to run away now while everyone starts throwing stuff at me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Roger Maris.
Tinker Evers Chance.
George Sisler.

[parkplace33]

Prewar HOFers who shouldn't be in the HOF. Lyons and Maranville come to mind.

[Balticfox]

Mickey Mantle. His cards are multiples the price of those of his contemporaries yet his talent was not.

[Snapolit1]

Sherry Mcgee.

Name means absolutely nothing to any baseball fan who is not on this board or a member the SABR Sherry Mcgee subcommittee, assuming there is such a thing.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Sherry Mcgee.

Name means absolutely nothing to any baseball fan who is not on this board or a member the SABR Sherry Mcgee subcommittee, assuring there is such a thing.

-
Every thread needs a card.
-

[molenick]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Sherry Mcgee.

Name means absolutely nothing to any baseball fan who is not on this board or a member the SABR Sherry Mcgee subcommittee, assuring there is such a thing.

Of course, part of the reason his name means nothing is because it is Sherry Magee.

[alywa]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Roger Maris.
Tinker Evers Chance.
George Sisler.

I agree on the first four, but for Sisler I think the market is probably right. There just aren't many Sislers, falling between the T & CJ eras and the Goudey cards. I only have one (below)

IMG_0747.jpg

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

Mickey Mantle. His cards are multiples the price of those of his contemporaries yet his talent was not.

Assuming you know this, but his valuation has a lot more to do with hobby and time and place than it necessarily does with his stats or rank purely on the field in comparison with his contempoararies.

Mantle was the golden boy of 1950’s Americana. His phiz was constantly on TV due to the Yankees multiple WS appearances. For at least a bit, he was arguably the greatest player in the game. (I wouldn’t argue he was better than Mays). When the kids of the 1950’s took the hobby public in the early 1980’s, Mantle was their guy over Mays, Aaron, Williams, Musial, - or anyone else. Having a high numbered ‘52 Topps RC that was at least for a large part of its history perceived to be rare didn’t hurt either.

The rest is history.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Tinker Evers Chance.

Agreed, and from a Cubs fan.

They are in because of the Franklin Adams poem. I mean Chance probably deserves it; good career and then was a manager as well - but the other two guys didn’t help turn more double plays necessarily than anyone else of their era. Tinker’s career batting average is .260 something?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by molenick

Of course, part of the reason his name means nothing is because it is Sherry Magee.

Oh. That explains it! The correct spelling guy is a household name.

[molenick]

Ha! Actually, Magee was a really good player...one of those people like Dahlen who might be in the HOF if the various veteran's committees ever seriously considered early players. If you believe WAR, he is the 14th best right fielder ever (ahead of Stargell, Wheat, Medwick, Kiner, Manush, and several other HOFers).

Are his cards overvalued? If so, is it because of the Magie error? Or because people think he may get in the Hall one day? I couldn't say. I have one.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Assuming you know this, but his valuation has a lot more to do with hobby and time and place than it necessarily does with his stats or rank purely on the field in comparison with his contempoararies.

Mantle was the golden boy of 1950’s Americana. His phiz was constantly on TV due to the Yankees multiple WS appearances. For at least a bit, he was arguably the greatest player in the game. (I wouldn’t argue he was better than Mays). When the kids of the 1950’s took the hobby public in the early 1980’s, Mantle was their guy over Mays, Aaron, Williams, Musial, - or anyone else. Having a high numbered ‘52 Topps RC that was at least for a large part of its history perceived to be rare didn’t hurt either.

The rest is history.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Being a Yankee gave him a huge leg up over anyone else in terms of popularity. Playing hurt added to his mystique. The tape measure home runs did too, and the switch hitting power. The folk hero personality, the blond crewcut, the muscular build. All the World Series. And, especially if you count the astonishing on base percentage, a very great player too. If PURELY as a player he is overrated, it isn't by much.

[phlflyer1]

Magee definitely was not a bad player. Just had the misfortune of playing for a lot of bad Phillies teams for most of his career.

And he certainly had one of the best poses in the E92 set!

[bk400]

Seditious, perhaps, but I'll say Jackie Robinson. I think he's overvalued, especially when compared to Hank Aaron.

[judsonhamlin]

Dizzy Dean. Admittedly a what-if with his injury and I get his broadcasting career helped but he should be in the same tier as Vance/Grimes/Lyons/Gomez et al

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Being a Yankee gave him a huge leg up over anyone else in terms of popularity. Playing hurt added to his mystique. The tape measure home runs did too, and the switch hitting power. The folk hero personality, the blond crewcut, the muscular build. All the World Series. And, especially if you count the astonishing on base percentage, a very great player too. If PURELY as a player he is overrated, it isn't by much.

Agreed. In the career OPS+ rankings for non-juicers with at least 7,500 plate appearances, he is 5th, behind only Ruth, Williams, Gehrig, and Hornsby.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[JimC]

I think Dizzy and Sisler get extra love becuase of how truly great they were before career altering injury. A bit like Koufax or Gale Sayers. Sisler's War 7 is essentially the same as Greenberg's. For the 6-7 year stretches they were healthy Sisler and Dean were as good as anyone.

Joe Wood is well collected too, probably for similar reasons.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by bk400

Seditious, perhaps, but I'll say Jackie Robinson. I think he's overvalued, especially when compared to Hank Aaron.

I love Jackie Robinson, but I have to agree. Although a 54 Topps Hank Aaron kind of brings these two to parity, at least somewhat.

But as stated above, Mantle and Wagner have to be at the top of overvalued.

And dare I even mention Babe Ruth? There is no real shortage of Babe Ruth's cards or memorabilia. I guess it's just that he was Babe Ruth.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by bk400

Seditious, perhaps, but I'll say Jackie Robinson. I think he's overvalued, especially when compared to Hank Aaron.

As a player perhaps, but he's only just now starting to realize the value he should have been accorded as an American historical figure.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by jingram058

But as stated above, Mantle and Wagner have to be at the top of overvalued.

Cards perhaps (I'm not going to say the T206 Wagner is overvalued given it's lore and enduring myth presence), but just in terms of garden variety fandom Cobb seems to be way more popular than Wagner. And that to me seems a bit messed up.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

As a player perhaps, but he's only just now starting to realize the value he should have been accorded as an American historical figure.

Totally agree about Jackie Robinson's place in American history. This said, I'd argue that Hank Aaron may have had it worse -- and for longer -- than Jackie Robinson did.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Assuming you know this, but his valuation has a lot more to do with hobby and time and place than it necessarily does with his stats or rank purely on the field in comparison with his contempoararies.

Mantle was the golden boy of 1950’s Americana. His phiz was constantly on TV due to the Yankees multiple WS appearances. For at least a bit, he was arguably the greatest player in the game. (I wouldn’t argue he was better than Mays). When the kids of the 1950’s took the hobby public in the early 1980’s, Mantle was their guy over Mays, Aaron, Williams, Musial, - or anyone else. Having a high numbered ‘52 Topps RC that was at least for a large part of its history perceived to be rare didn’t hurt either.

All correct and I agree. But I was answering the precise question posted:

Originally Posted by darkhorse9

...what pre-war players generally come with a higher value than their actual accomplishments on the field.

Not saying they're bad player, but they cost more to acquire than similar talent players. I'm not talking about a single card either. This applies to all cards of that player.

For one, Mickey Mantle wasn't as good as Willie Mays. And arguably Mantle wasn't as good as Ted Williams and Hank Aaron or even Roberto Clemente and Stan Musial.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by raulus

The obvious answer has to start with the 2 most notorious and expensive cards in the hobby:

Wagner
Mantle

But are Honus Wagner cards that much more expensive across the board? Because there are very real scarcity issues when it comes to his infamous T206 card so that dramatically skews the average price comparison.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Roger Maris.
Tinker Evers Chance.
George Sisler.

Are Roger Maris cards that much more expensive than those of comparable stars? Keep in mind that it did take 61 years for his single season home run mark to be legitimately broken.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

But are Honus Wagner cards that much more expensive across the board? Because there are very real scarcity issues when it comes to his infamous T206 card so that dramatically skews the average price comparison.

Sure seems like it, particularly for Wagner’s portrait cards.

[Econteachert205]

Any player the majority of adult average baseball fans don’t know.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by bk400

Seditious, perhaps, but I'll say Jackie Robinson. I think he's overvalued, especially when compared to Hank Aaron.

I agree.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

Any player the majority of adult average baseball fans don’t know.

But those players are not the ones whose cards command nose-bleed prices. It's the very well known players whose "walk" didn't match the talk that want mention in this thread.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

But are Honus Wagner cards that much more expensive across the board? Because there are very real scarcity issues when it comes to his infamous T206 card so that dramatically skews the average price comparison.

Yes, and it's a decent argument that is also why even common T206's in decent shape are as expensive as they are today.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by bk400

Totally agree about Jackie Robinson's place in American history. This said, I'd argue that Hank Aaron may have had it worse -- and for longer -- than Jackie Robinson did.

You may not be completely wrong, but it will never be viewed that way. It's because of the story and him being first. It's hard to imagine a worse situation than what Jackie faced in Philadelphia with Ben Chapman though. But to your point, there are likely other stories that may never be fully known.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

All correct and I agree. But I was answering the precise question posted:

As the original question was posed, yes I would agree with you.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

Are Roger Maris cards that much more expensive than those of comparable stars? Keep in mind that it did take 61 years for his single season home run mark to be legitimately broken.

Absolutely. Look at his rookie card, for example. Compare his cards to Hank Sauer and Bob Allison, whose stats are similar to his according to Baseball Reference. He's basically valued as a high mid tier hall of famer, if not higher.

[Misunderestimated]

All of the players who are famous for being infamous -- the Black Sox and Hal Chase come to mind.
Also there are a lot of low end HOFers (the guys who on the merits probably shouldn't be in the HOF in the first place) who are highpriced because they are HOFers. Thinking of the Frankie Frisch/Veteran's Committee inductees (e.g High Pockets Kelly). Also Tommy McCarthy, Rick Ferrell, Ray Schalk, and Lloyd Waner.
You've also got players who are famous for their off-the-field exploits like Moe Berg.
Roger Maris, Joe Wood, Jack Chesbro, and Hack Wilson are valued largely for single-season excellence.
Addie Joss is probably overpriced relative to the merits of his sadly truncated career too.
More recently there are the beloved great players who carry such a high premium that they are still overpriced relative to their merits -- Mantle and Clemente can be challenged on this basis.

[G1911]

Ten Million.

Art Whitney's dog.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Absolutely. Look at his rookie card, for example. Compare his cards to Hank Sauer and Bob Allison, whose stats are similar to his according to Baseball Reference.

Maris' rookie card is a really nice looking card though:

(Not mine.)

A full body shot against a gorgeous orange background, well let's just say it puts a smile on my face every time!

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

For one, Mickey Mantle wasn't as good as Willie Mays. And arguably Mantle wasn't as good as Ted Williams and Hank Aaron or even Roberto Clemente and Stan Musial.

Willie Mays = 1 ring
Ted Williams = 0 rings
Hank Aaron = 1 ring
Roberto Clemente = 2 rings
Stan Musial = 3 rings

Mickey Mantle = 7 rings

So, all those guys combined have the same number of rings as Mantle.

[jakebeckleyoldeagleeye]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Willie Mays = 1 ring
Ted Williams = 0 rings
Hank Aaron = 1 ring
Roberto Clemente = 2 rings
Stan Musial = 3 rings

Mickey Mantle = 7 rings

So, all those guys combined have the same number of rings as Mantle.

That Mays was a real terror in the World Series he was in. People just love to drool and slobber over the catch which was about the only thing he did in 3 of them.
Exactly zero homers.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Willie Mays = 1 ring
Ted Williams = 0 rings
Hank Aaron = 1 ring
Roberto Clemente = 2 rings
Stan Musial = 3 rings

Mickey Mantle = 7 rings

So, all those guys combined have the same number of rings as Mantle.

I go back and forth arguing with myself about how important rings are for a baseball player's legacy. Baseball is, at once, both more individualistic and more team-dependent than, say, football and basketball. Someone needs to come up with an advanced statistic for "World Series or playoff wins above replacement value".

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Willie Mays = 1 ring
Ted Williams = 0 rings
Hank Aaron = 1 ring
Roberto Clemente = 2 rings
Stan Musial = 3 rings

Mickey Mantle = 7 rings

So, all those guys combined have the same number of rings as Mantle.

To me rings mean less than nothing. Look at all the nobodies on the Yankees with many rings, are they somehow better than Ted Williams because they have some silly rings?

Besides guys with error cards like Bill Ripken or Randy Johnson in my opinion Mickey Mantle is in a league of his own for cards being overvalued.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bnorth

To me rings mean less than nothing. Look at all the nobodies on the Yankees with many rings, are they somehow better than Ted Williams because they have some silly rings?

Besides guys with error cards like Bill Ripken or Randy Johnson in my opinion Mickey Mantle is in a league of his own for cards being overvalued.

Agree, but if a player appears in enough post season games, I think their performance can make a bit of a difference in how you assess their career, in either direction. For example Kershaw's post-season horror show clearly has some downward impact on his overall rating. Mantle's WS Home Run records obviously added a bit to his status.
s

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Willie Mays = 1 ring
Ted Williams = 0 rings
Hank Aaron = 1 ring
Roberto Clemente = 2 rings
Stan Musial = 3 rings

Mickey Mantle = 7 rings

So, all those guys combined have the same number of rings as Mantle.

And Frankie Crosetti has 8 rings as a player and 9 more as a coach, so I suppose his cards should be ranked as most UNDER valued?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

The Black Sox players come to mind.

Harry Heilmann was at least as good as Joe Jackson. Basically, same average, but Harry had better power numbers. Both hit over .400 once. Harry played longer, compiled 2,499 hits, and had a noteworthy career as an announcer once his playing days were over.

Relative to each other, Jackson is way over-valued, and/or Heilmann is way undervalued.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

And Frankie Crosetti has 8 rings, so I suppose his cards should be ranked as most UNDER valued?

Uhhh...Make that 17 rings, as a player and a coach. He was in 23 World Series, total. He had so many rings, they started giving him engraved shotguns instead.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Harry Heilmann was at least as good as Joe Jackson. Basically, same average, but Harry had better power numbers. Both hit over .400 once. Harry played longer, compiled 2,499 hits, and had a noteworthy career as an announcer once his playing days were over.

Relative to each other, Jackson is way over-valued, and/or Heilmann is way undervalued.

You wonder if he'd just been just Joe Jackson, and not Shoeless Joe Jackson, if he would have been quite so wildly popular in the hobby. I don't want to say he's overrated, but on the other hand,for whatever reason Heilmann never seems to have captured anyone's imagination.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You wonder if he'd just been just Joe Jackson, and not Shoeless Joe Jackson, if he would have been quite so wildly popular in the hobby. I don't want to say he's overrated, but on the other hand,for whatever reason Heilmann never seems to have captured anyone's imagination.

With a nickname of "Fully Outfitted", Harry "Fully Outfitted" Heilmann never had a chance against "Barefooted" Joe Jackson when it came to popularity.


Brian (not Harry's nickname, and I believe Joe Jackson might have been wearing socks in that one game that ended up making him "Shoeless")

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by bnorth

To me rings mean less than nothing. Look at all the nobodies on the Yankees with many rings, are they somehow better than Ted Williams because they have some silly rings?

Better to have the "silly rings" than NO rings! Ha! The whole purpose of competing is to win, no ?? When people tell me that "baseball is mostly about the stats," then I tell them "why not get rid of the World Series then?" Why even have a championship ?? Oh wait, that's my point!! You play to win and Mantle did that better than anybody else !!

Originally Posted by jakebeckleyoldeagleeye

That Mays was a real terror in the World Series he was in. People just love to drool and slobber over the catch which was about the only thing he did in 3 of them.
Exactly zero homers.

Zero you say ?? Ouch !! Imagine if that had been the Mick in his spot ??