Tell me what under valued players or cards you feel need to rise in price

[Rookiemonster]

Hey welcome sinker slider ! And bishop so far not to many bashful members . Ok my number one under valued card is 1951 bowman willie mays . When you see what the mantle sells for it can only be a matter of time before it starts to even out . And there are fewer graded examples of the mays .

My friends number one is the Johnny bench rookie . As seen in the last couple years with the Nolan Ryan rookie . He feel it will and has to follow .

I think most vintage football is rediculiusly low and even some 80s stuff can grow some . 1984 topps football has to many names and key rookies . To be chalked up as 80s trash .

Well there is the bread and meat of what I have . There are some other cards I have in mind . But I really want to see what other collector have in mind . I love all the regional/oddball love I'm seeing

[mintacular]

i say no on oddball as many (not all) are not very attractive ex: post cereal and were not part of the massees collecting experience whereas topps base cards were. jmo

[kailes2872]

Disclaimer - I am very partial to Lefty - but I think that the '65 Steve Carlton is under valued. He has a career on par with Ryan and Seaver, but their RC's go for substantially more (I know that Seaver is a high #, but surprised). Carlton's cards go cheap all the way through - a nice graded '70 can be had for about the price of a pizza. I know that he was never super friendly with the media and didn't have the benefit of the run up at the time of the late '80's boom like Ryan did, but I think that he is the great pitcher that history is forgetting.

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by mintacular

i say no on oddball as many (not all) are not very attractive ex: post cereal and were not part of the massees collecting experience whereas topps base cards were. jmo

I cannot speak for the choices of collectors today, but as someone who collected the Post Cereal at the time they were issued, I'm rather ashamed of your opinion of them. In our neighborhood in the suburbs of Chicago, the Post were immensely popular. By that I am not inferring they were more popular than the easy-weezie Topps cards. Sorry, but with Topps, you took those for granted. You could always get your Topps fix. "They were all over the place."

Now, the Post Cereal were readily available, too. Just go to the grocery store, and there they all were. You could even look at the back of the boxes to select the box that had the most cards of players you wanted. It was so easy---and that's exactly the point where the "easiness" ceased. Now came the multitude of problems and complications. The end result 50+ years later?

Just look at the PSA or SGC pop reports at the numbers of specimens graded Near Mint/Mint or better. Not to be a spoiler, but for such a grandiose promotion that staggers the imagination, the numbers don't lie and they speak volumes.

As far as the appearance of the Post Cereal gems, I know referring to them as "gems" speaks for itself, but I was immensely attracted to the Post. For a card having a photo, player name, write-up, etc. Post did a terrific job. If you do not think so, you're not alone I'm sure. However, there are a bunch of us who absolutely love the Post Cereal. We've discovered some of the old TV commercials they ran to promote them, which Topps never had. Hey, in my mind then as a kid, with those great commercials, Post were "THE MOST".

Gotta go. Just had to take a few minutes and disagree with your taste in cards, and speak up for the Post. Then again, keep disliking them, Mintacular; less competition for me!

Take care. ---Brian Powell

[Peter_Spaeth]

Relative to their onfield greatness, Mays and Musial cards are dirt cheap. Most Willies cost a fraction of the corresponding Mantle, for example. But the factors that play into that are not likely to change.

[Laxcat]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Relative to their onfield greatness, Mays and Musial cards are dirt cheap. Most Willies cost a fraction of the corresponding Mantle, for example. But the factors that play into that are not likely to change.

As in: no one minding Mick's antics because while he could be an ass he was also nice to people. Whereas Mays.... I don't think that guy has smiled in 20 years, unless he was paid for it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Laxcat

As in: no one minding Mick's antics because while he could be an ass he was also nice to people. Whereas Mays.... I don't think that guy has smiled in 20 years, unless he was paid for it.

Musial was the nicest guy in the world, but his cards get no respect at all. Compare e.g. a 59-63 Musial with a 59-63 Mantle. Then look at the career numbers.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Musial was the nicest guy in the world, but his cards get no respect at all. Compare e.g. a 59-63 Musial with a 59-63 Mantle. Then look at the career numbers.

Aside from the popularity I think the stats that set Mantle apart from someone like Musial are the world series stats. 12 appearances. 7 wins. People and collectors remember championships. And champions.