Trout v. Legendary cards

[Tao_Moko]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

It's funny to me the disdain and annoyance that some vintage collectors (my primary focus) have towards modern cards and to some extent the prices they command. One is old, one is new. At the end of the day it's all pictures of dudes from a sport we love or like, and to 99.99% of the world spending even $500 on a baseball card is absurd. The current excitement in modern collecting world is great for the hobby because A) it cements the next generation of hobby members and B) the majority of "vintage" collectors start with current issues and begin working backwards.

Personally, I have no shock this card reached this value. If you even minimally follow the game on a daily basis it's clear he the best all-around player in the game and a multi-generational talent. Other members have mentioned names like Fidrych and Lindros and questioned his hobby future should he be injured tomorrow. It makes me wonder if they even currently follow the game. He's not a hyped prospect or the latest sensation. He is universally recognized as the best player in the game without question. In 8 full seasons (on primarily a losing team) he has finished 2,2,1,2,1,4,2,1 in MVP voting. He will be top 50 in career WAR for position players after 8.5 seasons following the abbreviated 2020 year. That stated, this is his singular most important card and given the current state of economic investments this price doesn't shock me. It might not be your cup of tea but be happy the hobby is rolling forward.




As someone who taught history (including the story of Ted Williams and his service during both WW2 and Korea) I completely understand both his importance to game and his contributions to our nation. But the comparison provided between Trout and Williams is about as relative as it gets in the context this of this entire thread and the comment the reply was referencing. The entire context of the comparison was their seminal greatness in the game of baseball and the comparative lack of team success. We can praise and celebrate Ted Williams' service to his country without belittling someone who lived in an entirely different time and circumstances. Also.... "Puckett" is a terrible analogy because A) he won 2 World Series Rings in 12 years and B) Trout is much much better statistically speaking.

You're correct. Comparing him to Puckett was a huge mistake. Trout has 1351 hits and a .304 so it's unlikely he improves his BA over the next three seasons and gets a thousand hits to match Puckett. He may with longevity do it, but doesn't seem on track at present. I wish Trout the best, but he's got a long ways to go to be in the same breath of the greats. Relative to card value - they are only worth what someone will pay so apparently Trout is worth it to some. Can't argue when there's no right answer. I'm not much older than Trout and I fought in two theaters as a Marine so he could have too but sports and money were more important. He probably would have been great to have on my team. It's a good reminder that these are just athletes playing a game and none of their pictures should be worth millions. To think what I could do with $3.2 million. Wouldn't be buy baseball cards.

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by Tao_Moko

You're correct. Comparing him to Puckett was a huge mistake. Trout has 1351 hits and a .304 so it's unlikely he improves his BA over the next three seasons and gets a thousand hits to match Puckett. He may with longevity do it, but doesn't seem on track at present. I wish Trout the best, but he's got a long ways to go to be in the same breath of the greats. Relative to card value - they are only worth what someone will pay so apparently Trout is worth it to some. Can't argue when there's no right answer. I'm not much older than Trout and I fought in two theaters as a Marine so he could have too but sports and money were more important. He probably would have been great to have on my team. It's a good reminder that these are just athletes playing a game and none of their pictures should be worth millions. To think what I could do with $3.2 million. Wouldn't be buy baseball cards.

As someone who comes from
A gold star marine family I thank you for your service but this attack on mike trout is beyond ignorant. And yes ted was a great patriot but he was also an asshole to many of his fans. They didn’t call him the spitter because he was a nice guy. And he was very arrogant wouldn’t even recognize the crowds appreciation after his final hr. Yes was an amazing person in many ways but also an asshole in many. I have never heard anything but compliments on Mr. trout and his interactions with fans. Military service is honorable but that doesn’t mean you are a better person simply for having done it. And I hate to break it but very few people collect cards of military heroes compared to those of athletic heroes.

[MattyC]

This hobby is in a very bad place. Shady pump and dump groups no different than slimeball boiler room hucksters. A veritable cottage industry of chop shops supplying TPGs with trimmed submissions by the boatload. The selfish shaking pom poms at the ever rising fake sales of doctored cards because they like the value of their collections going up. Then the marks believing the hype who go and buy into a market fueled on so much shade, thereby contributing real sales after the fake. It has nothing anymore to do with the games or their legends or the cards— it’s just some guys out there trying to 2x or 10x their money in a fast way.

[puckpaul]

Well, when you print $7 trillion, stuff happens. Stock market is like this too. See TSLA!

But many cards were undervalued if demand increased a little. We’ll see what happens. World is fragile, perhaps, but as we continue to print money and dollars get more worthless, this stuff will continue.

[Yoda]

Having lived through a few vintage card booms and busts, I would only offer one piece of advise during uncertain times, which we are certainly experiencing at the moment, and that is to buy value players and hold them when shocks come. Given their records and life stories, Mantle Cobb, Ruth and Gehrig cards will always hold value in tough times, but so will Matty, Wojo and Hornsby, Foxx, Clemente, Koufax, Mays etc.
As far as the Trout card is concerned, I just don't know, but the 4m price tag certainly represents a paradigm shift in the new card market.

[Delray Vintage]

Trout card going for $4 mill is like a high flying tech stock rising on momentum. No one can really say why it has risen so fast. There are speculators willing to bet on continued rise. It does not really matter to those speculators why it rises as long as there is someone willing to pay more. They will say it is unstoppable and a sure thing.

Cobb, Ruth and Mantle are the AT&T, Berkshire Hathaway like cards. They will rise in time and have strong fundamentals. Buyers want to own these cards for a long time and don’t think of their collection as a way to make a quick buck.

Young card buyers love Trout. He is a great player who will make the Hall of a Fame. That does not mean his $4 mil card or any of these created rarities will survive the test of time. Maybe I am wrong but fundamentals matter. History matters. I would take Honus Wagner and sleep well knowing it will appreciate over time. Trout is a Vegas Dave card. Vegas and betting are the key words.

[packs]

Trout is the greatest player any of us will ever see, unless one of us was lucky enough to be around to see Ruth and is still alive today.

Do I think this card is worth the sale price? No. But I'm also very surprised at the cavalier attitudes people have toward Trout. You will never see another player like him as long as you live, and there has only really been two players in history before him (Ruth and Mantle) who you might have seen.

Why not sit back and enjoy it?

[Tao_Moko]

What "attack" are you talking about? Ignorant? Way to go man, really nice and professional response. Re-read what I wrote. Trout is just not there yet as a player compared to those on the cards mentioned in this thread. He is not even tracking to match a mid-tier HOFer. Otherwise, I just responded to you and stated a fact. Wasn't looking for gratitude. He too was of fighting age during war time. So, that was not a fair comparison to Williams because Williams fought. I could likely bet my farm that Trout never hits .400 and unlikely to end up with comparable career stats. Doesn't mean I think he sucks. This conversation cannot really be had for another ten years or so. Lastly, I agreed that the card was worth what it brought. Simply because it sold for that amount. May not be worth that later, but for now it is. Signing off.

Originally Posted by glynparson

As someone who comes from
A gold star marine family I thank you for your service but this attack on mike trout is beyond ignorant. And yes ted was a great patriot but he was also an asshole to many of his fans. They didn’t call him the spitter because he was a nice guy. And he was very arrogant wouldn’t even recognize the crowds appreciation after his final hr. Yes was an amazing person in many ways but also an asshole in many. I have never heard anything but compliments on Mr. trout and his interactions with fans. Military service is honorable but that doesn’t mean you are a better person simply for having done it. And I hate to break it but very few people collect cards of military heroes compared to those of athletic heroes.

[Throttlesteer]

A lot of money for a guy in the same league as Frank Thomas. That card only has downward to go.

[maniac_73]

Originally Posted by Throttlesteer

A lot of money for a guy in the same league as Frank Thomas. That card only has downward to go.

Frank Thomas was not a 5 tool player

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

Frank Thomas was not a 5 tool player

Obviously you've never seen his Nugenix commercials.

[icollectDCsports]

If Frank Thomas's stats hadn't tailed off toward the last 1/3 of his career . . .

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by Throttlesteer

A lot of money for a guy in the same league as Frank Thomas. That card only has downward to go.

Most comparable by age is Mickey Mantle. I know, according to some here Mantle is way better because he single-handedly took crappy Yankees teams and led them to the promised land. On the other hand, Trout has lost with some loaded teams. Oh, wait...

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by Throttlesteer

A lot of money for a guy in the same league as Frank Thomas. That card only has downward to go.

That assertion gets made every single time on here when a modern card sells for a staggering figure. Did you foresee the card rising 10 fold when it was a $400,000 card?

Maybe the value will go up and maybe it will go down, but these assertions that modern cards will automatically go down in value have been proven wrong a whole lot in recent years.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Tao_Moko

He is not even tracking to match a mid-tier HOFer.

Say what? He's on track to be a top-tier HOFer. No one - no one - has 7 top 2 MVPs finishes in their first 8 seasons. And his 8th year he was the frontrunner for MVP when he got hurt. Played 3/4 of a season, still finished 4th.

It's weird the way baseball fans simply refuse to believe current players can possibly be as great as their heroes of the past. But let's be clear - Trout is as great as anybody we'll ever see.

You mentioned Trout won't hit .400. You're right, he won't. But Ted wouldn't hit .400 today either. Ted played in a completely different environment - not integrated, no one throwing 100 mph (let alone dozens of guys), no short relievers, no cross-country travel, barely any night games and so on.

As for manufactured scarcity, yep, it's an issue. Not a new one, given the Goudey Lajoie, etc. Would *I* pay $4m for a Trout rookie? No. But I totally get why somebody would.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Say what? He's on track to be a top-tier HOFer. No one - no one - has 7 top 2 MVPs finishes in their first 8 seasons. And his 8th year he was the frontrunner for MVP when he got hurt. Played 3/4 of a season, still finished 4th.

It's weird the way baseball fans simply refuse to believe current players can possibly be as great as their heroes of the past. But let's be clear - Trout is as great as anybody we'll ever see.

You mentioned Trout won't hit .400. You're right, he won't. But Ted wouldn't hit .400 today either. Ted played in a completely different environment - not integrated, no one throwing 100 mph (let alone dozens of guys), no short relievers, no cross-country travel, barely any night games and so on.

As for manufactured scarcity, yep, it's an issue. Not a new one, given the Goudey Lajoie, etc. Would *I* pay $4m for a Trout rookie? No. But I totally get why somebody would.

Yeah, but Ted was a marine and so was the poster who mentioned that. Mike had a chance to to be a marine but he decided to take the easy way out and is therefore less than. That’s at least what i got.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

Yeah, but Ted was a marine and so was the poster who mentioned that. Mike had a chance to to be a marine but he decided to take the easy way out and is therefore less than. That’s at least what i got.

Nice to know that people who aren't Marines are lesser human beings. Didn't know that.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Nice to know that people who aren't Marines are lesser human beings. Didn't know that.

Not in my view at least.

[Tao_Moko]

I don't think this. It was an extra accomplishment/challenge that some had and took on which separates them from the pack. Trout is an amazing player and seemingly good guy. He may turn out to be the best. But even statistics won't categorize him with with the likes of Ted and Yogi in my eyes. My only reason for bringing it up was because it was used as an unfair comparison. There are the rare birds like Tillman, but I don't expect entertainers to follow suit.

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Nice to know that people who aren't Marines are lesser human beings. Didn't know that.

[honus94566]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

Yeah, but Ted was a marine and so was the poster who mentioned that. Mike had a chance to to be a marine but he decided to take the easy way out and is therefore less than. That’s at least what i got.

Literally the stupidest thing I have ever read on this forum. And that's saying something.

Trout is one of the best to every play the game.

That being said, what is the likelihood this card is still in the same league as a T206 Wagner 5 years from now? 10? 20? 40? Very, very low. Maybe the buyer doesn't care, though. So there's that...

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by honus94566

Literally the stupidest thing I have ever read on this forum. And that's saying something.

Trout is one of the best to every play the game.

That being said, what is the likelihood this card is still in the same league as a T206 Wagner 5 years from now? 10? 20? 40? Very, very low. Maybe the buyer doesn't care, though. So there's that...

I guess you didn't read earlier in this thread or catch the sarcasm or both. If I truly felt that way, yes it would be ridiculous.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Say what? He's on track to be a top-tier HOFer. No one - no one - has 7 top 2 MVPs finishes in their first 8 seasons. And his 8th year he was the frontrunner for MVP when he got hurt. Played 3/4 of a season, still finished 4th.

It's weird the way baseball fans simply refuse to believe current players can possibly be as great as their heroes of the past. But let's be clear - Trout is as great as anybody we'll ever see.

You mentioned Trout won't hit .400. You're right, he won't. But Ted wouldn't hit .400 today either. Ted played in a completely different environment - not integrated, no one throwing 100 mph (let alone dozens of guys), no short relievers, no cross-country travel, barely any night games and so on.

As for manufactured scarcity, yep, it's an issue. Not a new one, given the Goudey Lajoie, etc. Would *I* pay $4m for a Trout rookie? No. But I totally get why somebody would.

Yes, but he hit .388 at age 38 a decade after integration. There were pitchers who threw 100 mph, Ryne Duran for one who also was a short reliever. Ted didn't get to play in a league watered down by expansion either. Ted absolutely could hit .400 today. Gwynn, Brett and Carew all came close. Trout also won't come close to Ted's .344 BA or .634 SLG.

[maniac_73]

Originally Posted by rats60

Yes, but he hit .388 at age 38 a decade after integration. There were pitchers who threw 100 mph, Ryne Duran for one who also was a short reliever. Ted didn't get to play in a league watered down by expansion either. Ted absolutely could hit .400 today. Gwynn, Brett and Carew all came close. Trout also won't come close to Ted's .344 BA or .634 SLG.

And we don't even know what we missed in Ted's prime years when he was in the war

[drcy]

Mike Trout is a poor man's Ron Kittle, and that is just stating undisputible fact.

. . . . That should keep this discussion continuing for a while.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by rats60

Yes, but he hit .388 at age 38 a decade after integration. There were pitchers who threw 100 mph, Ryne Duran for one who also was a short reliever. Ted didn't get to play in a league watered down by expansion either. Ted absolutely could hit .400 today. Gwynn, Brett and Carew all came close. Trout also won't come close to Ted's .344 BA or .634 SLG.

Gwynn & Brett both played 2/3 of a season. They don't count.

Ryne Duren? Sure, one guy. There are numerous guys hitting 100 now and DOZENS hitting 98. It's unquestionable that guys throw A LOT harder now.

Ted was great but lemme ask you this - if the two guys switch places, whose stats would improve and whose wouldn't?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Gwynn & Brett both played 2/3 of a season. They don't count.

Ryne Duren? Sure, one guy. There are numerous guys hitting 100 now and DOZENS hitting 98. It's unquestionable that guys throw A LOT harder now.

Ted was great but lemme ask you this - if the two guys switch places, whose stats would improve and whose wouldn't?

Trout has never led the league in hits, doubles, triples, home runs or BA. Led in RBI, SB, TB once and SLG 3 times. Williams led doubles 2 times, HR 4 times RBI 4 times, BA 6 times SLG 9 times and TB 6 times. He won 2 triple crowns. Williams would be dominant in any era. Trout is just a good player on a bad team that gets pitched around a lot. He is not a 5 tool player. He is an average OF with a weak arm. He is a power hitter with speed. That is not the best player I gave ever seen, not even close. Being the best player of the current generation does not make him one of the best all time.

It is not unquestionable that guys are throwing a lot harder, maybe 1 or 2 MPH on average. Man hasn't made some huge genetic leap in 60 years. Ted Williams hit Bob Feller slightly better than his career averages. He would have done very well against today's hard throwers.