I simply do not understand Modern - Doncic vs Mantle

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

Namath's title is possibly the most famous one in the history of American sports (and the most famous upset). It may have single-handedly propelled the NFL to eventually reach the behemoth status it has today in the country. It has the lore of the his swagger and guarantee. Probably the most remembered football game ever played.

Doncic would have to win many rings to even come close to his legacy comparing to that. And in the long run, I think his cards will need those kind of results to keep up with today's values.

As I have posted many times, the Namath card is the perfect storm, it's irrelevant that he may not be in the very first rank of the pantheon of quarterbacks. The Namath RC has little relevance to Luka Doncic.

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As I have posted many times, the Namath card is the perfect storm, it's irrelevant that he may not be in the very first rank of the pantheon of quarterbacks. The Namath RC has little relevance to Luka Doncic.

It's very relevant, Peter.

Namath was an average (or slightly above average) QB. He had maybe three good seasons as a player and won his only ring against a team whose star QB was injured. And yes, that QB was Johnny Unitas! A healthy Unitas would have picked the Jets apart. And finally, after the AFL/NFL merger, I believe the Jets never made the playoffs again with Namath as their QB. But people still love him and will pay big money for his 65' Topps rookie card.

So, with Doncic, it's the same thing. When his career is over, like Namath, he might not rank in the top ten, or even in the top twenty, and he might only get a ring or two, but as long as he has this enormous fanbase, then I expect this rookie card of his to keep growing in value.

[Snapolit1]

Demand for cards, particularly today, seems to be based more on star power than actual production. Or maybe 60/40 star power to production. And I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. Guys like Vlad Jr and Soto are very very good players but they also have star power. You don’t want to be the bathroom when they come up. Go to a baseball game anywhere in the country and you see young kids wearing their jerseys. Go to a Yankee game and still see Reggie jerseys. They have pizazz and flair. Not so much for many other very good players.

Babe Ruth of course had both to spare. Hence his exhaulted position in the hobby. My guy Lou was a little lacking in pizazz.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Demand for cards, particularly today, seems to be based more on star power than actual production. Or maybe 60/40 star power to production. And I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. Guys like Vlad Jr and Soto are very very good players but they also have star power. You don’t want to be the bathroom when they come up. Go to a baseball game anywhere in the country and you see young kids wearing their jerseys. Go to a Yankee game and still see Reggie jerseys. They have pizazz and flair. Not so much for many other very good players.

Babe Ruth of course had both to spare. Hence his exhaulted position in the hobby. My guy Lou was a little lacking in pizazz.

Soto and Guerrero are already among the top handful of players in the game, as is Doncic. And they are all young so they likely will become even better. I don't think think the excitement about them is misplaced.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

It's very relevant, Peter.

Namath was an average (or slightly above average) QB. He had maybe three good seasons as a player and won his only ring against a team whose star QB was injured. And yes, that QB was Johnny Unitas! A healthy Unitas would have picked the Jets apart. And finally, after the AFL/NFL merger, I believe the Jets never made the playoffs again with Namath as their QB. But people still love him and will pay big money for his 65' Topps rookie card.

So, with Doncic, it's the same thing. When his career is over, like Namath, he might not rank in the top ten, or even in the top twenty, and he might only get a ring or two, but as long as he has this enormous fanbase, then I expect this rookie card of his to keep growing in value.

Namath's card has joined a small pantheon of iconic FB cards. The player's rank relative to the rest of the HOF is not really relevant. National Chicle Nagurski, 1955 Topps AA Thorpe, 1958 Topps Brown, 1965 Topps Namath. None other than Brown reflect the GOAT at his position, really, but all are so iconic for collectors that they are at the top of the heap regardless. Unitas was a far better QB than Namath but his RC pales in comparison. Even newbie collectors know these sorts of cards. I had a meeting with a newbie collector/client (Millennial who started during the pandemic) and he absolutely freaked out at holding a 1952 Topps Mantle in hand. Took a photo and sent it to his fellow newbie collector Millennial friends. That doesn't happen with many cards. Is Mantle the GOAT? Nope. Ruth has that sewed up. But the 1952 Topps Mantle is iconic, so it revs up collectors like few other postwar cards can. I could have handed him a much rarer Ruth card and it would not have had the impact.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Namath's card has joined a small pantheon of iconic FB cards. The player's rank relative to the rest of the HOF is not really relevant. National Chicle Nagurski, 1955 Topps AA Thorpe, 1958 Topps Brown, 1965 Topps Namath. None other than Brown reflect the GOAT at his position, really, but all are so iconic for collectors that they are at the top of the heap regardless. Unitas was a far better QB than Namath but his RC pales in comparison. Even newbie collectors know these sorts of cards. I had a meeting with a newbie collector/client (Millennial who started during the pandemic) and he absolutely freaked out at holding a 1952 Topps Mantle in hand. Took a photo and sent it to his fellow newbie collector Millennial friends. That doesn't happen with many cards. Is Mantle the GOAT? Nope. Ruth has that sewed up. But the 1952 Topps Mantle is iconic, so it revs up collectors like few other postwar cards can. I could have handed him a much rarer Ruth card and it would not have had the impact.

Ok but you picked 3 football players that might be in the top 10 all time, and then Joe Namath. It is easy to see which one of those is different from the others.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

Ok but you picked 3 football players that might be in the top 10 all time, and then Joe Namath. It is easy to see which one of those is different from the others.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I don't follow football but I know those cards. That is my point. The Namath is one of the handful of attention-grabbing cards even among casual collectors. Thes players' relative rankings are irrelevant: the hobby values them without regard to relative ranking. The Johnny U 1957 RC is not one of the iconic cards, even though he is way better than Namath.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I don't follow football but I know those cards. That is my point. The Namath is one of the handful of attention-grabbing cards even among casual collectors. Thes players' relative rankings are irrelevant: the hobby values them without regard to relative ranking. The Johnny U 1957 RC is not one of the iconic cards, even though he is way better than Namath.

The players' relative rankings are irrelevant? You don't really mean that. Virtually all "iconic" cards feature an all-time great player. Surely that is more than coincidence.

Obviously there is more to an "iconic" card than the status of the player. The set itself plays a part, and there is often a special story surrounding the player, card or set. Not all great players' cards get to be iconic, but the circumstance where the iconic card is of a player not in the pantheon of all-time sports greats is rare.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

The players' relative rankings are irrelevant? You don't really mean that. Virtually all "iconic" cards feature an all-time great player. Surely that is more than coincidence.

Obviously there is more to an "iconic" card than the status of the player. The set itself plays a part, and there is often a special story surrounding the player, card or set. Not all great players' cards get to be iconic, but the circumstance where the iconic card is of a player not in the pantheon of all-time sports greats is rare.

Nagurski did not make the NFL official all time 100 greatest team. Just sayin. Dutch Clark did though.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

The players' relative rankings are irrelevant? You don't really mean that. Virtually all "iconic" cards feature an all-time great player. Surely that is more than coincidence.

Obviously there is more to an "iconic" card than the status of the player. The set itself plays a part, and there is often a special story surrounding the player, card or set. Not all great players' cards get to be iconic, but the circumstance where the iconic card is of a player not in the pantheon of all-time sports greats is rare.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Namath's card has joined a small pantheon of iconic FB cards. The player's rank relative to the rest of the HOF is not really relevant. National Chicle Nagurski, 1955 Topps AA Thorpe, 1958 Topps Brown, 1965 Topps Namath. None other than Brown reflect the GOAT at his position, really, but all are so iconic for collectors that they are at the top of the heap regardless. Unitas was a far better QB than Namath but his RC pales in comparison. Even newbie collectors know these sorts of cards. I had a meeting with a newbie collector/client (Millennial who started during the pandemic) and he absolutely freaked out at holding a 1952 Topps Mantle in hand. Took a photo and sent it to his fellow newbie collector Millennial friends. That doesn't happen with many cards. Is Mantle the GOAT? Nope. Ruth has that sewed up. But the 1952 Topps Mantle is iconic, so it revs up collectors like few other postwar cards can. I could have handed him a much rarer Ruth card and it would not have had the impact.

There are certain players whose popularity is always going to be well above their talent level for a variety of reasons. Mantle is the most obvious one. Namath too, although I think he was better than Samosa characterized him. Roger Maris comes to mind. (all New York so far, hmmmm.) Bill Bradley (hmmmm). I would say Kobe, actually.

[Natswin2019]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Namath was an average (or slightly above average) QB. He had maybe three good seasons as a player and won his only ring against a team whose star QB was injured. And yes, that QB was Johnny Unitas! A healthy Unitas would have picked the Jets apart. And finally, after the AFL/NFL merger, I believe the Jets never made the playoffs again with Namath as their QB.

As a life long Jets fan ill point out that they made the playoffs the very next season in 69. Gotta get credit for every playoff appearance since it doesnt happen often lol

[RCMcKenzie]

I think Doncic is about the 15th best player in the league.

Here's how he ranks on media sites that list their top current players

CBS #5
NBC #9
ESPN #6
The Ringer #10
SI- my laptop almost crashed trying to see the list

Leonard is out so far this year, so you can bump Doncic down one spot on each list when he returns.

I'm not bashing Doncic, he's a nice player.

[GasHouseGang]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

I think Doncic is about the 15th best player in the league.

Here's how he ranks on media sites that list their top current players

CBS #5
NBC #9
ESPN #6
The Ringer #10
SI- my laptop almost crashed trying to see the list

Leonard is out so far this year, so you can bump Doncic down one spot on each list when he returns.

I'm not bashing Doncic, he's a nice player.

How did he become 15th if the lowest he is on any of the media sites is #10?

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

How did he become 15th if the lowest he is on any of the media sites is #10?

Hi, David, I think players like Trae Young and Zach Lavine are better than Doncic, and the people who compiled the media lists had a different opinion from me.

Namath is known outside the hobby. He is a cultural icon known by the person on the street. If Jay Leno still did Jaywalking, would anyone know Luca Doncic? I would guess almost everyone I know in "real life" has never heard of Doncic, but would recognize the names of Namath, Mantle, Mays, and even Maris. Kobe? yes. Doncic? who?

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Hi, David, I think players like Trae Young and Zach Lavine are better than Doncic, and the people who compiled the media lists had a different opinion from me.

Namath is known outside the hobby. He is a cultural icon known by the person on the street. If Jay Leno still did Jaywalking, would anyone know Luca Doncic? I would guess almost everyone I know in "real life" has never heard of Doncic, but would recognize the names of Namath, Mantle, Mays, and even Maris. Kobe? yes. Doncic? who?

So you don't know ANYONE that's a sports fan? Weird.