The most grossly overrated card of all time...

[Hammerin'Hank]

Originally Posted by 1963Topps Set

In my opinion, is card # 311 from the 1952 Topps set.. Mickey Mantle.

First of all, I am tired of the card as being presented as his "rookie" card. It is not. That honor belongs to the 1951 Bowman card.. Yes.. Bowman trumped Topps here.

Mickey may be a borderline top 10 player of all time but his card values are that of the bonafide greatest player ever........which he plainly was / and is not.

[MattyC]

If card values were tied strictly to player performance, historical pricing would look a lot different across the board. There are so many intangibles that come into play, determining which players and cards become popular. I mean, Eddie Plank doesn't come to mind as a top 3 pitcher of all time, yet his t206 card is among the most expensive across all grades in the hobby. Also, some players had high peaks, that created enduring fan love, others had more longevity. So performance itself can be viewed in different ways, in terms of what makes a Top 10 player to each person. There are names like Rogers Hornsby and Stan Musial and Yogi Berra whose performances statistically would seem to demand greater card values, but collectors just have yet to fight enough over those cards at auction to raise the prices.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Hammerin'Hank

Mickey may be a borderline top 10 player of all time but his card values are that of the bonafide greatest player ever........which he plainly was / and is not.

It's more that he was the star of 6 World Championship teams. Similarly, Joe DiMaggio is looked at as far better than his stats/advanced stats. Championships do carry a lot of weight. Just look at Bill Russell in the NBA or Joe Montana in the NFL.

[1963Topps Set]

What about Yogi? He has 10 rings, 3 MVPs, yet is a fraction of Mantle's cards.

[MattyC]

I have also felt Yogi never gets his props in the card hobby. Perhaps it was because he was overshadowed by others on his own team, and there was only so much fan adoration to go around. Perhaps the unsung, unglamorous nature of his position? Perhaps the lack of an "it" card that looks badass and captured the minds of collectors during his playing days? Perhaps his lovable but not "stud" image that boys wanted to emulate? Just stabs at the reason, but whatever the reason(s), it seems he never caught fire in the card hobby. That said, his cards are far from cheap, especially in high end.

[1963Topps Set]

Yogi a stud? LOL!!!

[Volod]

At the risk of turning the thread into an undergrad psych discussion, i would suggest that people generally have a tendency, or need, to set up exalted figures to genuflect toward - "kings" of sport that "tower" over their colleagues, regardless of what the stats show. Thus, card collectors view Ruth, DiMaggio and Mantle as Yankee royalty, and players such as Berra and Maris as just spear carriers, no matter what they may have accomplished. You can see the same idolatry in other sports, as well.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by 1963Topps Set

What about Yogi? He has 10 rings, 3 MVPs, yet is a fraction of Mantle's cards.

Mantle led the AL in OPS+ every year from 55-64, except 57 (2nd to Ted Williams) and 63 (hurt). He should have been MVP every year during that period except 59 and 63.

Mantle led the AL in
Runs- 5 times
Triples -1
HR- 4
RBI- 1
BB -5
BAve - 1
OBP - 3
SLG - 4
OPS - 6
POS+ - 8
TB - 3
Triple Crown -1

Yogi never led the AL in any category. For 10 years Mickey Mantle was Babe Ruth/Michael Jordan. Berra was like Scottie Pippen. Berra was MVP in 1955 with an OPS+ of 120, Mantle led the league with 180.

[jason.1969]

I will go in a different direction here and avoid choosing a single card. Rather, I will go with Rookie Cards in general as the most overrated in the hobby--at least to me.

If the world were ending tomorrow and I would never have the chance to sell or trade cards again, I would take nearly ANY Willie Mays/Hank Aaron over any rookie card issued after 1954. And I would certainly take the 1976 All-Star Rookie cards of Rice and Lynn over their true 1975 multi-player RCs. Ditto for '69 Ryan vs '68, '68 Seaver vs. '67, Carew, Bench, etc.

[bn2cardz]

I think Mantle cards in general are overrated when you use Mays as the standard since he and Mantle correlated very well. Mays '51 Rookie goes for aprox 50% of a 51 Mantle is the same grade.

Whether you debate that Mantle was better than Mays or vice versa they were equal enough to cause the debate in the first place yet the prices of the cards don't reflect that.

[brian1961]

..."lips that speak knowledge are a rare jewel."

Jason, I'm right there with you on the grossly overrated status of rookie cards.

After 10-15 years of the organized adult hobby (69-84), collectors started to enjoy and hence created the category of rookie card collecting. Dealers immediately sensed this, and were naturally more than willing to jack up their current prices for rookie cards. I mean, they were plum pleased to take advantage of the situation. As they marked up the prices, collectors just assumed that meant they really were more important, which was kinda stupid. The only exception was the argument of Mickey Mantle's rookie card.

Those who owned the Bowman could never convince the owners of the '52 Topps which card was more significant. If they had just shut up and been content that the 51 Bowman was naturally important in and of itself, regardless of which one was recognized as the official rookie. But no, they wanted all the marbles. Truth will out, collectors love them both, but the 52 Topps is the most significant and valuable of the two. ---Brian Powell

[rats60]

Originally Posted by jason.1969

I will go in a different direction here and avoid choosing a single card. Rather, I will go with Rookie Cards in general as the most overrated in the hobby--at least to me.

If the world were ending tomorrow and I would never have the chance to sell or trade cards again, I would take nearly ANY Willie Mays/Hank Aaron over any rookie card issued after 1954. And I would certainly take the 1976 All-Star Rookie cards of Rice and Lynn over their true 1975 multi-player RCs. Ditto for '69 Ryan vs '68, '68 Seaver vs. '67, Carew, Bench, etc.

This is a good point. Although I'd disagree with you on a high # RC like Seaver or Clemente, but 1970 Bench should be his most expensive card rather than the more plentiful 1968. Same for Ryan.

Along similar lines, the 61 Mantle AS card is much more difficult than most of his regular cards.