Lou Gehrig underrated?

[Chris-Counts]

I'm surprised few have responded to the original question. I believe Jimmie Foxx is far more underrated than Lou Gehrig. Just look at the difference between their stats, and compare it to the difference between their card prices. I'm not saying Foxx was better, but he was way closer than the current card prices indicate. To a lesser degree, the same could be said about Hank Greenberg. On the opposite end of the spectrum, I would say Bill Terry and George Sisler — first basemen who were contemporaries of Gehrig — are vastly overrated.

Here are my only Gehrig cards, one of which is technically 1/4 of a card, but I like it anyway ...

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

I'm surprised few have responded to the original question. I believe Jimmie Foxx is far more underrated than Lou Gehrig. Just look at the difference between their stats, and compare it to the difference between their card prices. I'm not saying Foxx was better, but he was way closer than the current card prices indicate.

Absolutely spot-on, Chris. I am astounded at how little Foxx RCs sell for as compared to Gehrig. Any 1925 Exhibit Gehrig is legitimately a mid-five figures card or more. Foxx's Exhibit being priced at 10% or less of that is crazy.

[packs]

I think Foxx's flame out has a lot to do with his card sales. Doesn't help that he wasn't part of some significant all time team either. He played in some World Series early on but I'm not sure anyone remembers them for anything iconic like Murderers Row or something like that.

I DO think Foxx benefits from fantastic nicknames and his association with League of Their Own.

[G1911]

I second the choice of Foxx, there's a good argument there though Foxx ends up priced about where he should relative to other stars of the 20's and 30's.

Gehrig is still generally regarded as the greatest 1B of all time. He remains a household name among baseball fans. The only player in his time period that outsells him is Babe Ruth, who was clearly better than Gehrig. I do not see how he can thus really be considered underrated, either in cards or in baseball history.

[chadeast]

It's hard to call someone who is universally regarded as the best 1B of all time underrated. Agree that Foxx is more so, but I can't agree that he wasn't part of all time great teams. I consider the A's teams from 1928 to 1931 to be absolutely iconic, with Grove, Foxx, Simmons, and Cochrane leading the way as top tier all-time talents. The first two '33 Goudeys I ever bought, and the only two I owned for 10+ years, were Foxx and Simmons, because of my fascination with this dynasty.

EDIT: and which still causes me to do things like this without even realizing it. I just noticed this last week when I was consolidating. Oops

[packs]

But do you think that admiration is universal to casual fans in the same way Murderers Row or the Miracle Mets are?

[chadeast]

Originally Posted by packs

But do you think that admiration is universal to casual fans in the same way Murderers Row or the Miracle Mets are?

Definitely not. I was only setting the record straight that he in fact was part of all-time great teams. Foxx and those A's teams aren't nearly as well known to the casual fan. To a lot of people, there is what happens in New York, and then there's everything else.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

I'm surprised few have responded to the original question. I believe Jimmie Foxx is far more underrated than Lou Gehrig. Just look at the difference between their stats, and compare it to the difference between their card prices. I'm not saying Foxx was better, but he was way closer than the current card prices indicate. To a lesser degree, the same could be said about Hank Greenberg. On the opposite end of the spectrum, I would say Bill Terry and George Sisler — first basemen who were contemporaries of Gehrig — are vastly overrated.

Here are my only Gehrig cards, one of which is technically 1/4 of a card, but I like it anyway ...

Gehrig .340/.447/.632 OPS+ 179
Foxx . 325/.428/.609 OPS+ 160

For those that like WAR
Gehrig 114.1 in 17 seasons with only 14 full seasons Those 14 full seasons Gehrig had 113.8 WAR or 8.12 WAR per season.

Foxx 93.9 in 20 seasons. Foxx's best 14 seasons averaged 6.7 WAR.

Gehrig was also a monster in the postseason with 6 WS wins in 7 tries hitting . 361/.483/.731.

It really isn't close. Collectors want to collect the best. For prewar it is Wagner, Cobb, Ruth and Gehrig. Tier 2 players are going to trail behind badly.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by rats60

Gehrig .340/.447/.632 OPS+ 179
Foxx . 325/.428/.609 OPS+ 160

For those that like WAR
Gehrig 114.1 in 17 seasons with only 14 full seasons Those 14 full seasons Gehrig had 113.8 WAR or 8.12 WAR per season.

Foxx 93.9 in 20 seasons. Foxx's best 14 seasons averaged 6.7 WAR.

Gehrig was also a monster in the postseason with 6 WS wins in 7 tries hitting . 361/.483/.731.

It really isn't close. Collectors want to collect the best. For prewar it is Wagner, Cobb, Ruth and Gehrig. Tier 2 players are going to trail behind badly.

Foxx fell off HARD after a few years in Boston, but even at his best offensively, Gehrig was still better. Foxx Just hit more home runs. Foxx had some killer seasons though with both the A's and the Sox.

[chadeast]

Originally Posted by rats60

Gehrig .340/.447/.632 OPS+ 179
Foxx . 325/.428/.609 OPS+ 160

For those that like WAR
Gehrig 114.1 in 17 seasons with only 14 full seasons Those 14 full seasons Gehrig had 113.8 WAR or 8.12 WAR per season.

Foxx 93.9 in 20 seasons. Foxx's best 14 seasons averaged 6.7 WAR.

Gehrig was also a monster in the postseason with 6 WS wins in 7 tries hitting . 361/.483/.731.

It really isn't close. Collectors want to collect the best. For prewar it is Wagner, Cobb, Ruth and Gehrig. Tier 2 players are going to trail behind badly.

No one was arguing that Foxx was better than Gehrig. I think we all agree that Gehrig was clearly better, and the best 1B of all time. The question was which one of them was more underrated.

[Exhibitman]

One nice way to compare players of varied careers is to look at 7 year peak WAR:

Gehrig 68.1
Pujols 61.7
Foxx 58.5

The rest are substantially below these three.

Top 3 in WAR for 1B are Gehrig, Pujols and Foxx.

No one can really contest Gehrig's status as the GOAT, though I do not agree that Foxx is not a first tier HOFer; the #3 guy has to be.

I guess the question is more whether Foxx cards are undervalued based on his place in baseball history. Of course, that question assumes that card values correlate directly with on-field performance, which is not always the case. Beloved and iconic status can come from other sources besides just stats (hello, Nolan Ryan, #24 in WAR; Mel Ott and Frank Robinson have better career WAR than Roberto Clemente; guess which right-fielder is on a stamp?).

[egri]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Mel Ott and Frank Robinson have better career WAR than Roberto Clemente; guess which right-fielder is on a stamp?).

Mel Ott has a stamp as well: https://www.mysticstamp.com/Products...ates/4082/USA/

[rats60]

Originally Posted by chadeast

No one was arguing that Foxx was better than Gehrig. I think we all agree that Gehrig was clearly better, and the best 1B of all time. The question was which one of them was more underrated.

I don't think Foxx is underrated at all. Depending on if you consider Stan Musial a 1B or not, Foxx is widely considered #2 or #3 all time at 1b. Johnny Mize and Hank Greenberg are underrated, not Foxx.

As far as card values, people are drawn to the top few names. Players down the list are going to increase in value much slower. I don't think Foxx cards are undervalued at all. In 1933 Goudey after Ruth and Gehrig (and Lajoie) comes Foxx, Hornsby and Dean. He isn't like Eddie Collins who sells for less than many lesser players in t206.

[chadeast]

Originally Posted by rats60

I don't think Foxx is underrated at all. Depending on if you consider Stan Musial a 1B or not, Foxx is widely considered #2 or #3 all time at 1b. Johnny Mize and Hank Greenberg are underrated, not Foxx.

As far as card values, people are drawn to the top few names. Players down the list are going to increase in value much slower. I don't think Foxx cards are undervalued at all. In 1933 Goudey after Ruth and Gehrig (and Lajoie) comes Foxx, Hornsby and Dean. He isn't like Eddie Collins who sells for less than many lesser players in t206.

I can only speak to 33/34 Goudeys, but I agree with you. He's not underrated and priced pretty much right where he should be.

[Tao_Moko]

One of the best.