Vintage Undervalued Roookies

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Unfortunately not a rookie, but this is in our current auction:

There is a raw one on here for a couple hundred. Check the bst

[Kutcher55]

So is the 39PB Ted still on the list after the old label SGC2 just went for 3900 on eBay?

I finished in 5th place in the bidding woohoo!

[pherbener]

Originally Posted by Kutcher55

So is the 39PB Ted still on the list after the old label SGC2 just went for 3900 on eBay?

I finished in 5th place in the bidding woohoo!

It was a great looking card with some paper loss. Not a bad price given that!

[robertsmithnocure]

Originally Posted by Kutcher55

39 Play Ball DiMaggio seems very undervalued. First Joe D card other than the '38 mini-me Goudey nonsense and an absolutely classic photo. Yet the '41 Playball trades at multiples more.

What about his 1936 World Wide Gum card or his 1937 OPC?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Anyone say Monte Irvin yet?

[DeanH3]

How about Aaron's 1954 Johnston Cookies? It's an absolute bargain compared to the current '54 Topps prices.

[Stampsfan]

How about the ‘52 Topps Eddie Mathews? It has not seen near the price jumps of the ‘52 Maya and Jackie.
When I bought mine both the others were well under #407 in price, but not any longer.

[dio]

Originally Posted by DeanH3

How about Aaron's 1954 Johnston Cookies? It's an absolute bargain compared to the current '54 Topps prices.

All aaron had a jump but i don't think the demands are there, everyone wanted the topps.

[Big Six]

1965 Topps Carlton...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

We've been saying these same cards are undervalued ever since I can remember. There's probably a reason. That said, my vote would be for Seaver. High number, very tough card to find without one thing or another wrong, vastly underrated pitcher, arguably top 5 of all time.

Agreed. This has always been a pricey card. (I finally just landed one myself after wanting it literally for decades...) But the price range on them to me seems to always be tight. For example a PSA 8 may "only" be a $3k card, but even beat up ones and you are hard pressed to find them cheaper than $4-500 bucks. With that kind of activity on the lower end of the scale, it seems to me like the higher grade ones are artificially low. But I could be wrong.

[Kutcher55]

Originally Posted by pherbener

It was a great looking card with some paper loss. Not a bad price given that!

Agree it had great eye appeal.

[Kutcher55]

Originally Posted by robertsmithnocure

What about his 1936 World Wide Gum card or his 1937 OPC?

My bad. I still think the '39 Joe D is undervalued though.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Big Six

1965 Topps Carlton...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would tend to agree with you, but cards like that have seemingly been stuck in the mud for decades. '65 Carlton and Joe Morgan. '57 F. Robby and the '60 Yaz rookie. Just because a player is great doesn't always translate to card values. Stan Musial remains grossly undervalued for the player he was for virtually all of his cards that were produced after the 1940's. It's difficult to understand.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

I would tend to agree with you, but cards like that have seemingly been stuck in the mud for decades. '65 Carlton and Joe Morgan. '57 F. Robby and the '60 Yaz rookie. Just because a player is great doesn't always translate to card values. Stan Musial remains grossly undervalued for the player he was for virtually all of his cards that were produced after the 1940's. It's difficult to understand.

On the flip side, there is no purely baseball reason for Mantle to dwarf everyone else in value; obviously there are many intangibles involved in why some players are relatively underappreciated card-wise. But I don't expect after all this time much will change for Musial, Spahn, Foxx, E Collins, etc.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

On the flip side, there is no purely baseball reason for Mantle to dwarf everyone else in value; obviously there are many intangibles involved in why some players are relatively underappreciated card-wise. But I don't expect after all this time much will change for Musial, Spahn, Foxx, E Collins, etc.

True, but Mantle is virtually a unique situation unto himself, owing to how the hobby evolved in the late 1970's and early 80's. When things went from underground hotel shows to retail and multiple card shops in many towns by 1985 and later, many of the target baby boomer customers had all grown up idolizing Mickey Mantle. That's what I attribute it to, anyway. From a pure baseball perspective, he wasn't as good as Williams, Musial, Mays, Aaron, and possibly others.

[skelly423]

I've operated on this theory for a while, but the only players who really move the needle are all-time stars. Eventually everyone else fades into obscurity.
If you're not dealing with the players who were regarded as the top 1-2 players in the world during their career, their cards don't (and shouldn't) appreciate at the same rate as the all time greats.

There's no disrespect intended for these remarkable careers, but I don't look at these secondary stars as underpriced. I think their value reflects the fact that they aren't going to be the first names mentioned in a discussion of baseball history (Cobb, Ruth, Robinson, Mays, Aaron, etc.)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

True, but Mantle is virtually a unique situation unto himself, owing to how the hobby evolved in the late 1970's and early 80's. When things went from underground hotel shows to retail and multiple card shops in many towns by 1985 and later, many of the target baby boomer customers had all grown up idolizing Mickey Mantle. That's what I attribute it to, anyway. From a pure baseball perspective, he wasn't as good as Williams, Musial, Mays, Aaron, and possibly others.

Not totally unique. Maris values are utterly disproportionate. Same, honestly, with Koufax (150 wins). Munson. Purely statistically speaking, Jackie.

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

There is a raw one on here for a couple hundred. Check the bst

Not anymore there's not. Jarrod is rapidly becoming my nemesis - apparently we like the same type of cards, but he's quicker on the draw. [shakes fist at sky] JARROD!!!

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by skelly423

I've operated on this theory for a while, but the only players who really move the needle are all-time stars. Eventually everyone else fades into obscurity.
If you're not dealing with the players who were regarded as the top 1-2 players in the world during their career, their cards don't (and shouldn't) appreciate at the same rate as the all time greats.

There's no disrespect intended for these remarkable careers, but I don't look at these secondary stars as underpriced. I think their value reflects the fact that they aren't going to be the first names mentioned in a discussion of baseball history (Cobb, Ruth, Robinson, Mays, Aaron, etc.)

This seems right to me - it's not about all-time stats. The players whose cards skyrocket are the ones who transcend the baseball fan/hobby demographic and have some level of broader pop cultural significance. Which makes perfect sense, in that having, say, a Warren Spahn rookie card doesn't allow you to show off, because you first have to educate 99% of people on who Warren Spahn was. Then maybe they'll be a little bit impressed. Whereas a lot more people will be instantly impressed by your Mickey or Jackie.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Not totally unique. Maris values are utterly disproportionate. Same, honestly, with Koufax (150 wins). Munson. Purely statistically speaking, Jackie.

I would agree, but in proportion. Maris isn't valued anywhere near Mantle, of course.

[skelly423]

Originally Posted by ASF123

This seems right to me - it's not about all-time stats. The players whose cards skyrocket are the ones who transcend the baseball fan/hobby demographic and have some level of broader pop cultural significance. Which makes perfect sense, in that having, say, a Warren Spahn rookie card doesn't allow you to show off, because you first have to educate 99% of people on who Warren Spahn was. Then maybe they'll be a little bit impressed. Whereas a lot more people will be instantly impressed by your Mickey or Jackie.

You said that better than I did. I will add that I think there may be some extra boost that comes when a player starred for a behemoth like the Yankees rather than a smaller market like Milwaukee. The Yankees bring an automatic boost to pop cultural appeal (my wife knows the Yankees, she's go no idea where the Braves play/played). It's not fair, but I do think that if Stan Musial played in NYC, he would be mentioned in the same echelon as Willie Mays. Likewise, Mickey Mantle as a St. Louis Brown becomes just another name.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Same, honestly, with Koufax (150 wins). Purely statistically speaking, Jackie.

You just shut your Dodger hating mouth.

Seriously though, while the mystique of what might have been (and the unprecedented run of dominance) definitely lift Koufax over what his career numbers would lead you to expect. I think Jackie is underrated as an actual player.

Jackie - all the percentage numbers are among the all time greats at the position OPS+ of 132 if 6th all time among 2b in the 20th century. Since the brevity of his career wasn't even injury, but rather societally created I don't think you can look at counting stats the same way you can even with someone like Koufax.

Make me a list of 2b with a career slash of .311/.409/.474 it's a damn short list! Not a lot of nearly .900 Career OPS guys at 2b.

162 Game average of 111 Runs 178 Hits 32 Doubles 6 Triples 16 Home Runs 86 RBI 23 Steals 87 BB and only 34 K's is pretty stellar.

So yeah the counting numbers might not be there, but he was never mediocre, his career wasn't shortened by injury. The stats he was able to put up in the time he had are pretty astonishing.

[packs]

Originally Posted by skelly423

You said that better than I did. I will add that I think there may be some extra boost that comes when a player starred for a behemoth like the Yankees rather than a smaller market like Milwaukee. The Yankees bring an automatic boost to pop cultural appeal (my wife knows the Yankees, she's go no idea where the Braves play/played). It's not fair, but I do think that if Stan Musial played in NYC, he would be mentioned in the same echelon as Willie Mays. Likewise, Mickey Mantle as a St. Louis Brown becomes just another name.

That's been a prevalent theory in the hobby for a long time but interestingly enough it doesn't apply to modern cards in the least. Trout's cards can't be touched by anyone and he plays for a perennial loser and always will.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

I would tend to agree with you, but cards like that have seemingly been stuck in the mud for decades. '65 Carlton and Joe Morgan. '57 F. Robby and the '60 Yaz rookie. Just because a player is great doesn't always translate to card values. Stan Musial remains grossly undervalued for the player he was for virtually all of his cards that were produced after the 1940's. It's difficult to understand.

But it wasn't always that way. Ted Williams and Musial used to be priced in higher tiers. Some of these rookie cards were priced much higher relative to where they are today. 1938 Goudey DiMaggio and 1939 Ted Williams for Prewar. 1948 Bowman Musial, 1957 Brooks Robinson, 1960 Yaz, 1965 Carlton, 1967 Seaver and 1973 Schmidt for postwar. The 1968 Bench was always the same as the 1968 Ryan until ~1989-91 when Ryan got hot. Mantle wasn't priced above other top tier HOFs until a few dealers decided to buy up Mantles to sell to non collectors. So, I wouldn't absolutely say that some of these couldn't turn around.

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

True, but Mantle is virtually a unique situation unto himself, owing to how the hobby evolved in the late 1970's and early 80's. When things went from underground hotel shows to retail and multiple card shops in many towns by 1985 and later, many of the target baby boomer customers had all grown up idolizing Mickey Mantle. That's what I attribute it to, anyway. From a pure baseball perspective, he wasn't as good as Williams, Musial, Mays, Aaron, and possibly others.

There are several potential factors that explain the disproportionate value gaps between Mantle, Mays, and Aaron cards, considering their careers essentially began around the same time.

First, there is the Yankee factor. Mantle was a life-long Yankee, and played for the sporting world’s most well-known franchise. People collect the best player on the best team. Second, there is New York City factor. Although Mays partially played his career in NYC, Mantle played his entire career in it. Mantle received more exposure during his playing days.

Third, there is the winning factor. Mays and Aaron only have one title each. Mantle was a seven-time world series champion. Again, more exposure. Fourth, Mantle has the most iconic post-war card, which is arguably the second all-time most iconic card only behind the T-206 Wagner. There is a trickle-down effect to other cards. You see this with Wagner’s other cards as well.

Finally, I’m not trying to start any political debates, but there is the race factor. The 1950s and 1960s was obviously an entirely different era. White kids from this era grew up idolizing and pretending to be Mantle, while African American kids grew up idolizing and pretending to be Mays/Aaron at the plate in their sandlots.

This simply carried over to collecting. There are more white collectors than African American ones (at least based solely on my unscientific observations from attending shows for over 30 years), and these baby boomers are simply collecting their childhood hero more than Mays/Aaron. I think all these factors are at play.

On a side note, has anyone else observed the Mays explosion since January? You simply cannot find a decently priced Mays card anymore. Wow!

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by rats60

But it wasn't always that way. Ted Williams and Musial used to be priced in higher tiers. Some of these rookie cards were priced much higher relative to where they are today. 1938 Goudey DiMaggio and 1939 Ted Williams for Prewar. 1948 Bowman Musial, 1957 Brooks Robinson, 1960 Yaz, 1965 Carlton, 1967 Seaver and 1973 Schmidt for postwar. The 1968 Bench was always the same as the 1968 Ryan until ~1989-91 when Ryan got hot. Mantle wasn't priced above other top tier HOFs until a few dealers decided to buy up Mantles to sell to non collectors. So, I wouldn't absolutely say that some of these couldn't turn around.

Yeah but the Mantle price points relative to other HOF'ers have been basically the same for 40 years now. It could change, but I would be surprised if it changes dramatically.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

There are several potential factors that explain the disproportionate value gaps between Mantle, Mays, and Aaron cards, considering their careers essentially began around the same time.

Totally. The fact that he played his whole career in NY, was constantly showing his phiz on TV in October of every year, etc. etc. played heavily into WHY he was the idol of so many baby boomers who got into the hobby again in the 1980's.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Yeah but the Mantle price points relative to other HOF'ers have been basically the same for 40 years now. It could change, but I would be surprised if it changes dramatically.

I really don't see Mantle being replaced at the top. However, some of those cards could be more in line. Collecting in the 60s, Ted Williams was #1 followed by Musial, Mays, Koufax and then Mantle. Mays and Aaron seem to be closing the gap and in the past Jackie and Clemente have made big jumps. I can see Ted and Stan being guys poised for good run ups with their RCs leading the way.

[AGuinness]

I think the Speaker T206 could be on the list, which is considered his rookie by some (I'm sure that topic could be a whole other post).
Overall, I'm not sure that ANY cards these days are being undervalued. Some of the prices are just jaw-dropping. I don't think this is a bubble, per say, but I think that it's very likely that many cards will drop back down some when the pandemic really slows down and people get back to "normal" lives (some cards certainly much more than others). We'll see how many of the new collector/investors stay active, how many sell to collect the profits and how many shove their cards in the back of the closet.

[packs]

All due respect to Tris Speaker and Eddie Collins but why exactly are they due for a bump? Outside of this board specifically, I think it would be tough to find any casual fan who is familiar with either player. The images on their T206's aren't very inspiring either. I know people like the Collins portrait but it doesn't catch my eye like say, the Lajoie with bat does.

I think when it comes to T206's card image is always going to play a major role in value. That's why Shag and Titus are where they are. And why the Lajoie with bat is where it is. Not sure I see any reason to pay more for Speaker or Collins.

[bigred1]

Stan Musial for me, even lost age 24 season for military service.

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by packs

All due respect to Tris Speaker and Eddie Collins but why exactly are they due for a bump? Outside of this board specifically, I think it would be tough to find any casual fan who is familiar with either player. The images on their T206's aren't very inspiring either. I know people like the Collins portrait but it doesn't catch my eye like say, the Lajoie with bat does.

I think when it comes to T206's card image is always going to play a major role in value. That's why Shag and Titus are where they are. And why the Lajoie with bat is where it is. Not sure I see any reason to pay more for Speaker or Collins.

Maybe one reason to pay more for Speaker or Collins over Lajoie is that they were better baseball players.

[packs]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

Maybe one reason to pay more for Speaker or Collins over Lajoie is that they were better baseball players.

That's not how it works though. Otherwise Ten Million's Obak wouldn't be worth what it is. There needs to be an X factor for a card to take off that otherwise hasn't. I don't see a ton of interest coming Eddie Collins' way.

[Great Winfield]

There are two that stand out to me in a relative sense (making no judgement on whether the overall valuation "tide" is too high or not):

1. 1965 Topps Joe Morgan - There are only 80 PSA 9's and 2 10's. Sure, it is a two-player card, but the 9 at ~$2500 is almost certainly among the very cheapest high-grade rookie cards for any top 20 all-time player.

2. 1939 Play Ball Ted Williams - There are only 88 PSA 8's, 1 8.5, 12 9's and 1 10. Given the soaring prices of other top players, how is the PSA 8 not a six-figure card?? A mythical figure and American hero. His Baseballreference.com page is pure stats porn. Almost 5 prime years lost to military service. Most folks likely know about him not winning MVP in either of his triple crown seasons (not to mention the 1941 0.406 avg season) - but how about posting a 190 OPS+ in his final age-41 season, better than Joe D's BEST ever such figure. Pretty good final AB too!

[rman444]

Originally Posted by Great Winfield

His Baseballreference.com page is pure stats porn.

This made me smile

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Great Winfield

There are two that stand out to me in a relative sense (making no judgement on whether the overall valuation "tide" is too high or not):

1. 1965 Topps Joe Morgan - There are only 80 PSA 9's and 2 10's. Sure, it is a two-player card, but the 9 at ~$2500 is almost certainly among the very cheapest high-grade rookie cards for any top 20 all-time player.

2. 1939 Play Ball Ted Williams - There are only 88 PSA 8's, 1 8.5, 12 9's and 1 10. Given the soaring prices of other top players, how is the PSA 8 not a six-figure card?? A mythical figure and American hero. His Baseballreference.com page is pure stats porn. Almost 5 prime years lost to military service. Most folks likely know about him not winning MVP in either of his triple crown seasons (not to mention the 1941 0.406 avg season) - but how about posting a 190 OPS+ in his final age-41 season, better than Joe D's BEST ever such figure. Pretty good final AB too!

With due respect to Bill James, I would not rate Morgan in the top 20 players of all time. Anywhere south of 2 I would not argue with Williams though.

[rats60]

It seems like all the guys who lost prime years to the war are underrated. Joe DiMaggio, Bob Feller, Hank Greenberg, Johnny Mize, etc. Even though Musial only lost 1 year, it still could have made a big difference, such as hitting 500+ HRs. With Williams spending 5 years in the service, people used to give him credit, but not really anymore.

For Williams just give him 154 game averages for those 5 seasons and he has 2400 runs, 3550 hits, 700 2b, 700 HR, 2450 RBI, 6500 TB, 2700 BB and 160 WAR. He is now top 5 in all those and 1st in runs, RBI and BB. If he happens to break Ruth's HR record first then his profile goes higher. As time goes by people just forget and not having those numbers suppress his card values.

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by packs

That's not how it works though. Otherwise Ten Million's Obak wouldn't be worth what it is. There needs to be an X factor for a card to take off that otherwise hasn't. I don't see a ton of interest coming Eddie Collins' way.

Sorry, I don't know what system of valuation to which you're referring. The topic at hand is undervalued rookie cards; not the premium paid for cool mustaches, funny names, or beautiful sunsets.

[JollyElm]

I beg you, for the love of God, for everything holy, please, please, please, please FIX THE FRICKIN' MISSPELLING IN THE THREAD TITLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm begging you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[packs]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

Sorry, I don't know what system of valuation to which you're referring. The topic at hand is undervalued rookie cards; not the premium paid for cool mustaches, funny names, or beautiful sunsets.

Sure, but for something to be undervalued it has to be priced below the level the hobby generally views the player or card. So when someone says Ted Williams' rookie card is undervalued, it's because the hobby more or less loves Williams.

You're talking about Eddie Collins and Tris Speaker, who don't have that same status in the hobby. I think their cards are priced accordingly per the interest they have. So I'm wondering what you see. If you think they were better than people give them credit for, that's not how I interpreted the question about value. But is definitely fair to say. They were great players.

[jchcollins]

Feel free to disagree, but unless it's like the M101 Babe Ruth, I've never thought that some black and white cards have gotten their due simply because of that. Most if we are being honest simply aren't as attractive as color issues.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

I beg you, for the love of God, for everything holy, please, please, please, please FIX THE FRICKIN' MISSPELLING IN THE THREAD TITLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm begging you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe the OP Is a native Canadian eh?

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Maybe the OP Is a native Canadian eh?

Impossible. We only care about hockey cards, toques, maple syrup and Rush.

We have no time for silly shit like men running around bases, apple pie, or an overgrown woman made of copper with a sore arm who just loiters and can't seem to find a gown that fits properly.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

Impossible. We only care about hockey cards, toques, maple syrup and Rush.

We have no time for silly shit like men running around bases, apple pie, or an overgrown woman made of copper with a sore arm who just loiters and can't seem to find a gown that fits properly.

Triumph would like a word with you...

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Triumph would like a word with you...

Hold On, don't do Too Much Thinking. Just because I may be an Ordinary Man who's Headed for Nowhere and living in A World of Fantasy, doesn't mean I'm unaware that Somebody's out There like Triumph.

Never say Never and always Follow your Heart, it's the Rocky Mountain Way my friend.....

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Feel free to disagree, but unless it's like the M101 Babe Ruth, I've never thought that some black and white cards have gotten their due simply because of that. Most if we are being honest simply aren't as attractive as color issues.

Agree with this. Wanted to buy Teddy Ballgame's RC so many times, but the card is so not attractive in b&w and just couldn't pull the trigger. His 54 Bowman is the card to own

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

Hold On, don't do Too Much Thinking. Just because I may be an Ordinary Man who's Headed for Nowhere and living in A World of Fantasy, doesn't mean I'm unaware that Somebody's out There like Triumph.

Never say Never and always Follow your Heart, it's the Rocky Mountain Way my friend.....

LOL, I have a few Canadian friends who I joke with about Rush vs Triumph. Basically saying you can have Triumph, you have to share Rush.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

Agree with this. Wanted to buy Teddy Ballgame's RC so many times, but the card is so not attractive in b&w and just couldn't pull the trigger. His 54 Bowman is the card to own

I've always preferred this Ted Williams card over all others.

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Feel free to disagree, but unless it's like the M101 Babe Ruth, I've never thought that some black and white cards have gotten their due simply because of that. Most if we are being honest simply aren't as attractive as color issues.

I feel like BW is one of the reasons the '47 Bond Bread Jackie Robinsons haven't seen the increases his Leaf has. However does seem his Bond Bread portrait and rounded corner rookies are picking up steam of late.

[Blunder19]

I would say the 51 bowman mantle is under valued as compared to the jump the 52topps counter part has recognized. I think the 51 bowman mantle rookie will be on its way up on the near future. $10k for a psa 1 type jump.