Super high end Mantle cards

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

Unfortunately, I don't remember for sure. Back then I started getting the Post cereal cards first since that's what I collected most as a kid. So the first Mantles I bought were probably $100 or less for the Post Mantles. They were and are typically less than Topps from the same years. I would guess the '52 Topps Mantle would have been maybe $2,000 at most. Maybe someone has a Beckett magazine from back then and can give us a more accurate figure. Local dealers were going by "book" value back then with almost everything priced at NM prices.

Here's the 1986 Beckett book prices on the 52 Mantle.

img799.jpg

[IMG]http[/IMG]

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Here's the 1986 Beckett book prices on the 52 Mantle.

Attachment 586390

[IMG]http[/IMG]

Obviously a big difference between Mays and Mantle which isn't surprising since Mantle is a high number (even if it is a double print). What is interesting to see is that Mays is listed for more than Jackie. Is that still true now?

[raulus]

Originally Posted by jayshum

Obviously a big difference between Mays and Mantle which isn't surprising since Mantle is a high number (even if it is a double print). What is interesting to see is that Mays is listed for more than Jackie. Is that still true now?

Took a quick stroll through some PSA sales data. Felt lazy so didn’t look at much, just PSA 5 for the last ~18 months. There’s a pretty wide range of prices, but they’re pretty comparable between Mays and Jackie. Some outliers that might push you one way or another, but right around $15k, give or take, for each of them.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by jayshum

Obviously a big difference between Mays and Mantle which isn't surprising since Mantle is a high number (even if it is a double print). What is interesting to see is that Mays is listed for more than Jackie. Is that still true now?

What about Campy selling for more then both Mays AND Jackie?

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

What about Campy selling for more then both Mays AND Jackie?

Campy played a huge role in integrating baseball and was a great ball player. Unfortunately all was overshadowed by his terrible accident.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Campy played a huge role in integrating baseball and was a great ball player. Unfortunately all was overshadowed by his terrible accident.

Oh, absolutely. It was more of a comment of how much more respect he had then in the hobby, as compared to now. Guy won 3 MVP’s, was the dominant catcher in his league for nearly a decade, and was a star in the Negro Leagues for years, before getting his late start in the MLB.

Despite his resume, outside of a few key cards, most of his cards can be had at Mid-tier HOF’er prices.

That guide just proves, he used to be much more appreciated by collectors. I was doing shows back in the late 80’s, and I remember collectors treating Campy with almost the same reverence as Jackie. Not so much today.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Oh, absolutely. It was more of a comment of how much more respect he had then in the hobby, as compared to now. Guy won 3 MVP’s, was the dominant catcher in his league for nearly a decade, and was a star in the Negro Leagues for years, before getting his late start in the MLB.

Despite his resume, outside of a few key cards, most of his cards can be had at Mid-tier HOF’er prices.

That guide just proves, he used to be much more appreciated by collectors. I was doing shows back in the late 80’s, and I remember collectors treating Campy with almost the same reverence as Jackie. Not so much today.

Maybe it's metrics? Short career of course, but still, only 17th among catchers by JAWS.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Maybe it's metrics? Short career of course, but still, only 17th among catchers by JAWS.

Jackie was a striking regal looking man. Campy? A little funny looking. Maybe the Yogi Berra effect.

[GaryPassamonte]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

What about Campy selling for more then both Mays AND Jackie?

Campy was in the high number series and was not a double print. I think that had a bearing on the values back then.

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

Campy was in the high number series and was not a double print. I think that had a bearing on the values back then.

It certainly did in my mind 40 years ago. Even prior to that, in 1972, the publication of THE BOYS OF SUMMER had me interested in all those BOYS OF SUMMER, especially Campanella. Viewing Ron Greenwood's collection of 53-55 Stahl-Meyer Franks masterpieces at the 1972 Midwest Sports Collectors Convention was eye-opening, for sure. I was mesmerized by the Stahl-Meyer Campanella. Later, I traded a 68 Topps 3D Mel Stottlemyre to Larry Fritsch for the 52 Topps Roy Campanella. A high school chum gave me the 3D of Stot for free. Larry was happy; I was very happy. Meanwhile, back to the OP...

Regardless of the revelation Mantle, Robinson, and Thomson were double-printed, collectors back then were making a furious effort to obtain Mick and Jack, particularly. Being as it was 1980 / 81 when the double-print discovery was made, the adult hobby was so on fire it didn't matter; the demand was sky-high.

It seems to me the demand for Mickey Mantle cards has been extremely strong since before I began collecting in 1961. Demand for Jackie Robinson has progressively increased through the years. Speaking about Jack, there just are not many issues having a card of him. The key is Jackie signed an exclusive contract with Topps, and he understood that to be nobody else. For Mickey, the bubblegum card exclusivity ended when Bowman went out of business at the end of '55. Of course, 98% of you know this, and I need to keep it focused on Mr. Mantle, as the OP talks about.

The thinking that it is pivotal in your card collecting focus, desire, and pursuit whether or not you saw the player play, whether at a game or on TV, is flat-out irrelevant. IF you had the privilege to see the player, I know it is a plus, but it's not a determining factor. It seems to me if you had a Dad or Mom that particularly liked a certain player, that often will play a bigger role than seeing them. Still, speaking out of both sides of my mouth, I began watching Chicago Cub games on TV in 1967, and I do admit being particularly thrilled and affected by the home runs I saw Ernie Banks hit!

Nevertheless, I never saw Mickey Mantle play, live or on TV, yet while he played, it was always my biggest cardboard thrill each year to get Mickey's card, not Ernie, Willie, Hank, Roberto, Sandy, or Don Drysdale. You probably weren't that way, but that's how I was.

In the end, we associate many things with many things. Nothing is wrong, as long as collecting brings us some happiness. (and we don't overspend........)


Have a good day. Keep it coming. --- Brian Powell