WOW! 1960 Yaz rookie PSA 9

[thenextlevel]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Carew (high number, 7 batting titles). Rose. Morgan. So for me Yaz is at best 8th on the 60s list.

Well, since all of these rookie cards are relatively equal to obtain, I assume that if the 1960 Yaz is ranked that highly, it is because that he is considered a more superior ball player than the rest(ex: Carew batting titles). This goes back to my original point of Yaz being a worthy Hall of Famer, and that he didn't just get in on popularity. Otherwise, how would his card be ranked higher than 50% of the Hall of Famers that you listed.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Ted: didn't Brock essentially take over for Musial? I think Musial was still playing a lot of left field his last year.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Ted: didn't Brock essentially take over for Musial? I think Musial was still playing a lot of left field his last year.

Peter

Brock was already a 4-year established ballplayer (with the Cubs) when he was traded to the Cards. Furthermore, he did not directly step into Musial's "footprints". Musial
played his last game in Sept 1963. Brock was traded to the Cards in the Summer of '64.

Both Mantle and Yaz were 20 year old rookies when they replaced DiMag and Ted W, respectively. And, they directly stepped into the "footprints" of these two great legends.

Think about it, there is significant psychological factor in play here, which is not case in Brock's situation.


TED Z
.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Peter

Brock was already a 4-year established ballplayer (with the Cubs) when he was traded to the Cards. Furthermore, he did not directly step into Musial's "footprints". Musial
played his last game in Sept 1963. Brock was traded to the Cards in the Summer of '64.

Both Mantle and Yaz were 20 year old rookies when they replaced DiMag and Ted W, respectively. And, they directly stepped into the "footprints" of these two great legends.

Think about it, there is significant psychological factor in play here, which is not case in Brock's situation.


TED Z
.

Ted, good points. To be precise Mantle did play one season with Joe D. whereas Yaz simply filled Ted's position the following year. But with the Yankees expected to win the pressure on Mantle was probably greater.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Ted, good points. To be precise Mantle did play one season with Joe D. whereas Yaz simply filled Ted's position the following year. But with the Yankees expected to win the pressure on Mantle was probably greater.

Peter

I recall the Spring of 1952 quite well, Mickey had a slow start (perhaps as you said...."the pressure"). At the beginning, the fans were booing him when he struck out.

As the season progressed, the boos turned into to cheers. Mantle finished 1952....batting .311 with 23 HR's and 87 RBI's. Some of those HR's travelled near 500 feet.

And, the rest is history.


TED Z
.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I remember as a kid when Bobby Murcer was supposed to take over for Mantle. He had a decent career, but it didn't quite work out that way.

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Peter

I recall the Spring of 1952 quite well, Mickey had a slow start (perhaps as you said...."the pressure"). At the beginning, the fans were booing him when he struck out.

As the season progressed, the boos turned into to cheers. Mantle finished 1952....batting .311 with 23 HR's and 87 RBI's. Some of those HR's travelled near 500 feet.

And, the rest is history.


TED Z
.

From NYT 12-28-52

[nat]

Mickey is going to have to ask for a big raise if he ever wants to afford one of his rookie cards.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

From NYT 12-28-52

It just seems wrong that his rookie card in pristine condition is worth more than mickey made in his whole career!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by thenextlevel

Well, since all of these rookie cards are relatively equal to obtain, I assume that if the 1960 Yaz is ranked that highly, it is because that he is considered a more superior ball player than the rest(ex: Carew batting titles). This goes back to my original point of Yaz being a worthy Hall of Famer, and that he didn't just get in on popularity. Otherwise, how would his card be ranked higher than 50% of the Hall of Famers that you listed.

I don't know what the argument is. My only point which I stand by is that the public perception of Yaz is a little inflated, due to his popularity. Nobody here is saying he wasn't a worthy HOFer or a great player. You could make the argument that relative to his card values Mantle is overrated, and I would, but that doesn't mean I don't think Mantle wasn't great.

[thenextlevel]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I don't know what the argument is. My only point which I stand by is that the public perception of Yaz is a little inflated, due to his popularity. Nobody here is saying he wasn't a worthy HOFer or a great player. You could make the argument that relative to his card values Mantle is overrated, and I would, but that doesn't mean I don't think Mantle wasn't great.

No I agree with you. I was responding to the gentleman earlier who questioned whether Yaz should be in the HOF bc of playoff stats and playing for Boston. That's when you started posting the splits, etc. I must have mistakenly assumed that you were siding with him.