Ridiculous

Runscott · #1 12-29-2016, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnorth

Trout is the IT player now but he isn't even as good as Pujols was. As soon as he has a bad year or injury his card prices will drop like a rock of a very tall cliff.

Agreed, and that's what makes collecting modern cards completely different from collecting vintage. You might consider Trout a "lock" to have a great career, but the same could be said for Mattingly, etc, early in their careers.

I would say that collecting cards such as this Trout - (which will never end up as a Carp, but possibly a Salmon) <=== see what I did there? - is more akin to collecting modern game-used than to collecting pre-war cards.

bn2cardz · #2 12-29-2016, 12:52 PM

To be fair, though, Trout has a WAR7 of 48.5 that places him 8th all time for center fielders. A WAR7 is the best 7 WAR years for a player and he has only played 6 years so far. If he only has a 2.5 as hist best WAR from here on out he would tie DiMaggio for WAR7.

If you compare him to all the people ahead of him in Center Field Career numbers (Mays, Cobb, Mantle, Speaker, Griffey, DiMaggio, Snider) he beats all of their WAR numbers in their first 6 years of play.

He is being compared to the likes of Mattingly, Puig, Stratsburg in this thread. Trouts average yearly WAR is 8. Mattingly never even got above 7.2, Puig never had above a 5.3, Stratsburg never above a 3.5. Even Pujols has a 6 year total of 46 (average of 7.7).

Trout may still get injured and never come back but to put him in the same class of other supposed greats that didn't live up is a mistake. He would be closer to Mantle or Mays slumping after their first 6 years.

Runscott · #3 12-29-2016, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

To be fair, though, Trout has a WAR7 of 48.5 that places him 8th all time for center fielders. A WAR7 is the best 7 WAR years for a player and he has only played 6 years so far. If he only has a 2.5 as hist best WAR from here on out he would tie DiMaggio for WAR7.

If you compare him to all the people ahead of him in Center Field Career numbers (Mays, Cobb, Mantle, Speaker, Griffey, DiMaggio, Snider) he beats all of their WAR numbers in their first 6 years of play.

He is being compared to the likes of Mattingly, Puig, Stratsburg in this thread. Trouts average yearly WAR is 8. Mattingly never even got above 7.2, Puig never had above a 5.3, Stratsburg never above a 3.5. Even Pujols has a 6 year total of 46 (average of 7.7).

Trout may still get injured and never come back but to put him in the same class of other supposed greats that didn't live up is a mistake. He would be closer to Mantle or Mays slumping after their first 6 years.

Okay, okay - I'm off to the bank to try for a $500,000 loan so I can buy what is obviously the best deal ever on the greatest baseball card in modern history.

bnorth · #4 12-29-2016, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Runscott

Okay, okay - I'm off to the bank to try for a $500,000 loan so I can buy what is obviously the best deal ever on the greatest baseball card in modern history.

Good luck on the loan Scott.

Now if someone could explain WAR to me with out using words like "theoretical replacement" and "approximation" I would really appreciate it. Even when doing a google search all I come up with is what sounds like a bunch of ifs and buts with no real hard stats. Even baseball reference says "There is no one way to determine WAR". Sounds like a made up stat people use to say my favorite player was better than yours if we theoretically replace this approximation.

Runscott · #5 12-29-2016, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnorth

Good luck on the loan Scott.

Now if someone could explain WAR to me with out using words like "theoretical replacement" and "approximation" I would really appreciate it. Even when doing a google search all I come up with is what sounds like a bunch of ifs and buts with no real hard stats. Even baseball reference says "There is no one way to determine WAR". Sounds like a made up stat people use to say my favorite player was better than yours if we theoretically replace this approximation.

Ben, I started to do the same search, especially when he brought up the Mattingly example, but decided that it didn't really matter. Buying that Trout card isn't just a gamble that he will have a full career. It's much less than that.

bn2cardz · #6 12-30-2016, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Runscott

Okay, okay - I'm off to the bank to try for a $500,000 loan so I can buy what is obviously the best deal ever on the greatest baseball card in modern history.

I wasn't commenting on the price of the card, purely a reply to the idea that he may crash and burn. He may, but he still has had a very impressive 6 year stretch to start his career. I think a case could be made that it was even enough to put him in the HOF if he just has an average career from here on.

As far as the price, it may be based on the Lebron James RC that sold for $312k through Goldin Auctions. I think there are more things going for the Lebron card than this card has, but it could influence the seller's thinking.

Mr. Zipper · #7 12-29-2016, 07:37 PM

The debate isn't really how Trout will compare to the all time greats, the question is will there be long-term interest in the supercalifragilistic card in the future. And, will someone with the means to pay for it also have the motive?

Even if Trout ends with numbers that would make the Babe hang his head in shame, will anyone care enough about this card to dump 6 figures on it? Is it that special and universally known? In a hobby flooded with so many 1 of 1 manufactured cards you need a scorecard to keep track, it seems pretty unlikely to me. But what do I know? If I found that card in a garage sale I'd guess it was worth about $40.

ruth-gehrig · #8 12-29-2016, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

The debate isn't really how Trout will compare to the all time greats, the question is will there be long-term interest in the supercalifragilistic card in the future. And, will someone with the means to pay for it also have the motive?

Even if Trout ends with numbers that would make the Babe hang his head in shame, will anyone care enough about this card to dump 6 figures on it? Is it that special and universally known? In a hobby flooded with so many 1 of 1 manufactured cards you need a scorecard to keep track, it seems pretty unlikely to me. But what do I know? If I found that card in a garage sale I'd guess it was worth about $40.

My $11 offer was immediately rejected. $40 seems a bit steep to me

RichardSimon · #9 12-30-2016, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ruth-gehrig

My $11 offer was immediately rejected. $40 seems a bit steep to me

Ok, I say $25.50.

rjackson44 · #10 12-30-2016, 08:25 AM

no one is buying this card ,,,

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ridiculous	GrayGhost	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	47	05-24-2012 02:30 AM
How Ridiculous	oldjudge	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	25	09-01-2010 05:43 PM
This is getting ridiculous	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	8	11-27-2003 08:24 AM
Now this is truly ridiculous	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	5	11-17-2003 04:26 PM
THIS IS RIDICULOUS	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	4	08-06-2003 01:11 AM