What’s the obsession with Mickey Mantle?

[ALR-bishop]

Discussions about the value of Mantle cards in and of themselves and relative to other stars like Aaron and Mays ( personality and all) have occurred over on post war from time to time

[steve B]

I think the question is a fair one.

It also leads to some deeper questions, about why one player over another, why one card more than another.

Mantle obviously has become sort of a symbol of his era, he certainly performed well enough. And had the advantage of playing in NY for what was one of the all time great teams.
But Mays was really close in performance, and also played in NY his first two years.
Had the team stayed, and if he'd retired after 1971 instead of hanging on a bit too long, how would he be viewed.

I think the NY effect has a bunch to do with it. Even when I was a kid, NY seemed like a special place where everything was bigger and better and more spectacular. And that was suburban western Mass/Ct in the 70's. I can only imagine the impression it had in most of the country in the 50's.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I've posted this before in response to the same question.

First and foremost perhaps, factoring in an unbelievable number of walks, he was even better than his counting stats suggest. Top 10 player in my opinion.

New York during the 1950s. See Ken Burns, The Capital of Baseball.

Yankees. All the World Series.

Sorry to say this, but white.

The mystique of playing in pain and even at his extremely high level falling short of his ability.

Switch hitter.

Combo of power and speed.

His charisma, the down to earth folk hero personality.

The big forearms.

There's probably more.

[perezfan]

I also think the OP's question was fair. I've thought about it a lot, and certainly understand his immense popularity among Baby Boomers and those slightly older. Plus, it's just a classic and iconic Baseball Name... "Mickey Mantle". Perhaps second only to Babe Ruth, in terms of generating immediate name recognition, and having a certain "ring" to it.

But I do wonder how his values will hold up after the Baby Boom generation has passed. That will leave nobody who actually saw him play, or idolized/admired him in the ways described above. I think there may be a lesser premium placed on Mantle, with a decline starting around the year 2030 or so.

Just my humble opinion, and only time will tell.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Ruth and Gehrig and Cobb have held up pretty well. I think Mantle will too. But who knows.

[JollyElm]

Mantle is gold. I don't know how rare the metal actually is, but like William Devane, I would stockpile it if I could. Mantle cards (seemingly) always go up in value, so whenever ebay puts out their 15% off coupons, the first things I look for are Micks. He played a bit before my time and as a New Yorker I've never understood the obsession with him, but the reality is he's at the apex of the collecting world and I don't see that ever changing.

This is a poll thread I started a while back, to try to see how many people around these parts actually saw Mantle play. It may help add a bit to the current discussion...
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=255158

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I also think the OP's question was fair. I've thought about it a lot, and certainly understand his immense popularity among Baby Boomers and those slightly older. Plus, it's just a classic and iconic Baseball Name... "Mickey Mantle". Perhaps second only to Babe Ruth, in terms of generating immediate name recognition, and having a certain "ring" to it.

But I do wonder how his values will hold up after the Baby Boom generation has passed. That will leave nobody who actually saw him play, or idolized/admired him in the ways described above. I think there may be a lesser premium placed on Mantle, with a decline starting around the year 2030 or so.

Just my humble opinion, and only time will tell.

Yeah, his chief competitor name-wise was Mickey Mouse, who hasn't faired too badly either, but couldn't hit the curve I'm told.

[D. Bergin]

Well obviously being on the Yankees and winning all those titles don't hurt.

But, going off the idea he was just a big strong guy that hit a lot of homers kind of misses the point.

One quick look at his statistics and he was also a sabermetricians dream player.

Considering he played hurt most of his career and was a shadow of himself by his age 33 season, he sure has quite an accumulation of peripheral stats we didn't even take into account 20+ years ago. An "accumulator" he was not.

Just one example is WPA (Win Probability Added). He's #5 All-Time in this accumulated stat. Only guys ahead of him are Barry Bonds, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Ted Williams. The only actual player with a comparable number of plate appearances on this list is Ted Williams. Everybody else around him has quite a few more.

It's up to everybody else to decide how much stock they put in this particular stat, but it's just one of many he rates very highly on.

[Jerry G]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Discussions about the value of Mantle cards in and of themselves and relative to other stars like Aaron and Mays ( personality and all) have occurred over on post war from time to time

Mickey was terrific, but I was the other kid that traded for The Man.

[Huysmans]

What a ridiculous question.
Its like asking what's the fascination with Stradivarius, or Rembrandt, or Fabergé, or Ferrari?
People like the absolute best.
It's not rocket science...

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

What a ridiculous question.
Its like asking what's the fascination with Stradivarius, or Rembrandt, or Fabergé, or Ferrari?
People like the absolute best.
It's not rocket science...

Well expressed, Brent.

I suppose the OP was asking both why there is such an obsession with Mickey, as well as, why, in a manner of speaking, do you yourself have such an obsession with Mickey Charles Mantle. With one, you get someone's opinion about the obvious huge fascination with Mick, and the drive to collect him---PASSIONATELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!

But with the other, if they're willing to take the time and trouble to ponder the matter, why he or she is obsessed with collecting Mickey. Considering the exorbitant amount of time and money some, including myself, have spent collecting Mickey Mantle, both questions and especially the personal one, are well worth the time exploring and pondering.

Funny, you mention another fascination of mine---Ferrari. It's as you say, people like the absolute best, though with Ferrari, I hone in on certain eras of their racing history, and collect them in fine 1/43rd scale models. I much prefer that for its practicality. I'd have to work many lifetimes for the surviving racing sports car of the real thing I savor, if that is, the current owner was willing to part with it. They are generally auctioned, and those dogfights are not for the timid of heart, nor pocketbook!!!!!!!!!!!!

All the best, Brian Powell

PS----I was ALWAYS in the same camp with my little buddy above. I would effortlessly trade any Stan Musial I had to get a Mickey Mantle. Be that as it may, at the time I began collecting, 1961, Stan the Man was respected in my Chicago suburb, but Mickey was revered. In 1961, Mickey was the number 1 most wanted, most cherished, most desired player on a baseball card, and he continued so through 1969 when Topps went ahead and produced Mickey, though he had announced his official retirement early in spring training of that year.

[661fish]

If Mantle was not a Yankee, things would have been different.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by 661fish

If Mantle was not a Yankee, things would have been different.

And what if Ruth, Gehrig or DiMaggio weren't Yankees?
Would they be less popular?
There is obviously more acclaim for ANY player playing with ANY iconic team, within ANY sport.


... and thanks Brian. I always enjoy reading your posts.