Early 90's stars--prices/collectibility
olb31
Posts: 3,325 ✭✭✭✭✭
Frank Thomas, Chipper Jones, Ivan Rodriguez, Jim Thome, Manny Ramirez, Jeff Bagwell, Kenny Lofton. Frank seems to have a huge advantage over all the others, but realistically it doesn't look like he should.
Ivan - was an incredible player and a great catcher. I would think one of the top 5 or 6 catchers of all time
Chipper - fabulous 3rd base, one of the top 6 or 7 of all-time
Bagwell, Thome and Thomas - all fantastic, but is there really that much difference in their play and stats? Not really. BUt Frank gets most of the accolades from the collectors.
Manny - PED issues, but in my opinion, probably the best of the group, certainly helped the Red SOx over the curse of the babe, twice.
Kenny - great at what he did and I get why his cards sell for much less than the others, but still HOF credentials.
Not downing Frank as much as wondering why the others aren't in the same categories, price/value wise?
Thoughts. I collect all of these above kind of equally.
Comments
Ken Griffey Jr called and would like to be added to this list..
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
i am trying to compare all the other ones but griffey jr.
Griffey and Thomas were the faces of the hobby in the 1990s. It’s simply the collector nostalgia and demand that drive their prices higher, since the supply of everyone on your list is endless.
Griffey for his combination of speed, power and youthful swagger on the field. Guy was a nightly SportsCenter highlight reel.
Thomas was the most complete hitter of his generation. Batted over .300, 100 runs, 100 RBi, multiple MVPs, perennial ALL-STAR and did it in the body of an NFL TE. The sport had never seen someone with Frank’s size and plate discipline like that before. Add in a few deep playoff runs, the spotlight of the Windy City, his ear to ear smile and you have the combination that separates him from the rest of your list.
Chipper is a distant third, but clearly the third most collectible on this list. He was the #1 overall pick and lived up to the hype. Hit for average, power and lots of World Series appearances.
Manny and Bags are linked to PEDs, Lofton was speed only and Thome was always quietly in the shadow of another star wherever he played.
When I think of my two favorite players growing up in this era, it is always Griffey and Thomas. No contest…emotions will always win over a numbers comparison. I could stare at these cards for eternity. I coveted these cards, packs and boxes as a kid. Was the stuff of legends in the 1990s!
do you still have alot of boxes of 89 upper deck and 90 leaf. i do not want to buy any i was just wondering how many you have in your unopened collection. thanks.
The are more 90 Leaf Thomas in PSA10 than grains of sands on all the world's beaches.
At one point in the pandemic it was going for a bit over $600. Nov 2023 I purchased one a small local show for $95. Only picked it up to have one with every PSA flip - well major flip changes not minor
I do keep one of my 10's on customized shelf for card slabs in my office, next to my 91 Stadium Club Thomas. The 90s leaf may be as common as dirt it does remind me of fun times of my collecting youth.
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Thomas was my fave player as a kid and I’m slightly obsessed with the OPC Thomas rookie. Have a bunch of nice ones and some 90 wax and a bunch of 90 factory sealed sets. This is my nicest pack pulled one so far.
I think Chipper is the best buy right now, maybe the #2 best all around player of those mentioned, who isn't linked to steroids.
I recently bought eight 1991 Topps Micro sets to break looking for a Chipper. The Micro is very tough in a 10, almost as bad as the Desert Shield rookie.
Here are my results;
😞
I think all the dudes I mentioned (except for Lofton, but he was really good) were dynamite players.
WAR
Chipper 52
Griffey 58
Bagwell 65
Thomas 88
Thome 90
Manny 109
So all of these guys did a lot. Manny probably more than all of the others because of the curse and winning 2 championships with Boston. including world series mvp and 29 postseason HR's batting 285.
Frank Thomas had a total of 49 postseason at bats with 3 HR batting 224. Griffey 69 at bats 6 Hr.
Postseason - Chipper and Manny are way ahead of the others.
It interesting how things work out. For Thomas, he played for the hapless white sox, played in very few playoff games and one could say never played in a big game. Same for Griffey Jr. Never really played in a big game. But collectors seek out their cards more than Chipper and Manny, who played in tons of big games and played very well.
I think if we are going to throw in the PEDS, which I don't think it matters myself, it's hard to think that Thomas wasn't taking something. When you go back and look at his 1987 card, he looks like a defensive linemen and the Roids were huge in 1987. I played college football then and i can attest that lots of people took them.
Like I said I collect just about all of these guys (refractors mainly), like all of them. Out of the group, I like Thome the best, seemed like a very good person and played hard. Manny second, just made lots of big plays, Chipper third, just a stud from the outset, Griffey, Thomas, Bagwell. But bagwell's numbers are quite impressive better than I remembered.
Lofton has a higher WAR than 3 of those guys at 68. I don’t know enough about the stat to say what that means, but I see people use it for HOF arguments.
Does that mean he was a better player than those guys or is it more of a counting stat?
I'm with you. Not knowledgeable enough to tell at the moment. I guess i Skimmed right by Lofton on the list. But I think he gets in the Hall at some point. Going by what we see and hear, you would think that Lofton was a nobody.
I don't believe WAR is a good number to compare players. Here's two guys who look pretty equal to me. Hard to understand how Boggs can have so much higher of a WAR. Gwynn has 200 more total bases and 300 more SB. Boggs walked more. Both won GG's at their positions. I did like Boggs a little better, but this WAR number seems WAY off.
I couldn't believe Lofton's WAR was higher than Griffey's! Griffey's was 83.8.
Not sure where those WAR numbers came from, I looked on baseball reference dot com.
Chipper Jones was 85.3
Frank Thomas-73.8
Bagwell-79.9
Thome-73.1
Manny-69.3
Thome was my personal favorite.
Why isn't Cal Ripken mentioned? Was far more collected, in my area, N.E. Tenn. ,
Than any of those players mentioned except for Griffey Jr.
The prices and collectibility of early 90s baseball stars should be quite attractive to collectors who don't want to pay enormous prices for chase cards just so they can finish a set. Although not much stands out from this period due to suspicions of substance abuse, etc., new generations of collectors will someday appreciate being able to acquire them easily. Insert cards will always have some kind of popularity as well.
Gobble.
No doubt. Ripken is great. I was wondering outloud why some of the early 90's rookies had such little fanfare compared to Thomas. I think several of them were as good or better than Thomas. Ivan Rodriguez is one of them, imo. We are comparing those guys. Boggs Gwynn and ripken -- those dudes are on another pedestal.
As far as the above comparison -- makes no sense. Both are somewhat clones of each other as hitters. Both likeable guys too.
1992 Fleer Sensations - Thomas, Bagwell, Ivan
1992 Rookie phenoms - Lofton
Tiffany's of most of them. Gold winners. OPC. There are several decent products to collect from these guys. Not expensive but could net you some cash in 9.5 or 10.
I think WAR is a good metric to compare a player to the mean, but as you say, and I agree, not a great metric to compare a player to another player directly - especially when they didn't play the same position (game rules and team/player approach can also influence results). It's going to be right more than it's wrong, but it's not perfect. It's like tossing up some grass to see what the wind's doing.
Gwynn would have a negative WAR factor playing mostly RF and Boggs would have a positive WAR factor playing mostly 3rd base. There are also league and park adjustments to a player's WAR.
An example of Gwynn is 1989. He was a pretty solid outfielder in his day and his performance in 1989 was top 3 in the league for his position (in my opinion). He won the GG with a -2.8 dWAR. The positional adjustment for RF is -12.5 and dWAR is calculated as dWar = fielding + positional adjustment. So you can see that his fielding was good. Overall, WAR is generally calculated using fielding + batting + positional adjustment. A RF starts in a big hole and a 3rd baseman starts > 0.
The positional adjustment for RF is -12.5 and dWAR is calculated as dWar = fielding + positional adjustment. So you can see that his fielding was good. Overall, WAR is generally calculated using fielding + batting + positional adjustment. A RF starts in a big hole and a 3rd baseman starts > 0.
>
>
Thanks for that explanation and now I am positive WAR has nothing to do with who's the better player. Maybe it works if they both play the same position.
An example would be my favorite player, Harmon Killebrew.
He should have played the vast majority of his time at 3rd base, but he played 3 years in Left Field (he was not a very good outfielder) and he also played a lot of 1st base to help get a better team on the field. Now I understand why he has such a low (60.3) WAR. Ridiculous!
Ironically, he suffered 2 significant injuries at 1st, probably costing him the 600 HR club membership.
Further more, in this case WAR is also doubly wrong, because by moving to a different position, he made the team even better than if he would have said "nope. I'll stay at 3rd". A versatile player ADDS wins to a team.
WAR......no thank you.
His WAR is 95.9.
Totally agree on the versatility comment. The value of a player who can play multiple positions, especially moving between infield and outfield, is not accurately captured in WAR. This is where WAR doesn't do what it's even intended to accomplish - which is to identify how valuable a player is to a team (their team or others) based on the impact of losing said player.
I do think WAR has some useful purpose, but it's more of a conversation starter than a conversation ender - or should be. Anyone using WAR as a mic-drop is fooling themselves.
It comes down to popularity. How they were marketed. HOF is a popularity contest too. I cant really take the HOF seriously because of that.
If we are looking at the guys who performed the best in the decade of the 90s or performed best in any decade in the history of baseball Albert Belle and Juan Gonzalez belong on the list. They just weren't cool. People didnt like them. So much so that people dont even believe they accomplished anything. Belle has a slugging percentage higher than Mantle Mays Aaron and the discussed face of the 90s Frank Thomas. But completely dismissed. His #s dont count because....well they just dont.
Belle has two legendary XBH seasons. One over 100 which less than 20 people ever have done and one for 99 which maybe less than 25 to 30 have done. If you look at MLB.com leaders in all-time slugging, in terms of people whose pictures are in color he is #6. #7 is Juan Gonzalez. Who also belongs in the discussion of best 90s guys or best decades of work of all-time. But he was as uncool as uncool gets too. So he is dismissed. What he did, the two of them did, its like it never happened. It only happened if you were liked a lot.
Collecting, just like the HOF is a popularity contest. You dont like a guy you make excuses. Belle and Gonzalez careers too short or I dont know maybe they did PEDs or just something. But if someone is liked that thing does not matter. Kirby Puckett throw out the rule, only applies to Juan and Albert.
Cal had a 95.9 WAR. I don't have a clue as to what WAR is. It's higher
than most of the players mentioned. Followed baseball from the what
are cards worth. Never heard of WAR. Doesn't matter, Cal played on
teams that would have to improve to SUCK.
ulysses brings up a good point about popularity. outside of frank thomas has any white sox player been popular? they are a horrible organization and pretty much always have been. mariners not much better. red sox - probably one of the top 3 organizations in mlb. indians very popular team for many years. manny was on the indians ws team also.
so when we say popularity - is it the team, your performance, your personality? espn? happen chance?
in my opinion performance is #1, team is #2 as witnessed by all the yankee cards that are overpriced, then personality. but maybe espn and happen chance are bigger items.
while thomas was a great player, he certainly isn't the top player in the group i mentioned and i'm not sure why his cards are so much more popular than thome chipper ivan or manny. at best they should be the same. thomas is only qvershadowed by trout for total playoff ineptness of a hof type superstar.
and as I mentioned, i buy all these guys as i think they are very collectible and in my opinion underpriced.
Weren't there whispers at one point of Ivan Rodriguez and PEDs?
Big Hurt was a big part of the hobby in the early 90's. HIs 1990 Leaf, 1990 Topps Error and 1992 Rooke Sensations are iconic cards in the hobby. Then you got his 1993 Finest Refractor from arguably the most iconic set ever. He had complete insert sets with Donruss/Leaf in the 1994/1995 time frame as well showing his hobby impact at the time.
Yes, Irod's weight decreased by 20 pounds going into spring training 2005. MLB had just implemented a more stringent testing policy. hmmm
Canseco said he witnessed Ivan using steroids (most of the guys Jose outed have since tested positive and/or admitted to using).
Ivan also had a drastic weight loss 2004-05 before testing was implemented. Not proof, but suspicious.
Finally when asked if he tested positive after one of the survey tests, Ivan replied "Only God knows".
I read Canseco's book and if he said he saw Ivan use, I believe him.
so ivan and manny took them, thome didn't thomas didn't, kent did, chipper didn't, -- if anybody looks like they took them it's frank thomas -- i really don't care if he did or not, but the board seems to be obsessed with them. they probably all took something.
please take a look at frank's 1987 card. he was 19 years old in the pic. if that pic isn't an advertisement for PED's, then no one took steriods.
Thomas was a college football tight end, so he could just have been a big guy who could hit a baseball.
You are correct and what do football players take -- Steroids!!!!!! I played Football for an ACC school in 1987, many of my teammates were taking steroids, especially then lineman and Tight ends. ANd this was the height of steroids. i guess my point would be don't be naive. There is a high probability that many athletes at the higher levels take PED's. It's a tough business.
This is why it doesn't matter to me if Thomas Mcgwire Canseco Clemens. -- took PED's, many players before and after these guys took and they still take the,. There is way too much money involved, you have to stay at the top of your game to be able to keep playing. Doesn't meant everyone takes them, but it also doesn't mean only 12 baseball players in history took them.
Agree on the fact that football players took a lot of steroids, but I can't go along with convicting Thomas on no other evidence than that.
Vehemently disagree on the steroid issue. Bonds, Sosa, McGwire and Arod (plus some others) all surpassed better players because of their illegal advantage. Not only players they competed against, but those (like Killebrew) that went before.
At least 4 confirmed cheaters have surpassed Harmon on the all time HR list who weren't as good as him at slugging. I hate to see that.
Why would you think that Jeff Kent took PED's? You should look into that some more.
How much did it sale for is one of the funniest and most ignorant things I've ever heard.
I have never heard of Jeff Kent linked to steroids. I don't agree with linking Frank Thomas to steroids just because many football players use them.
As a kid living in the Rangers' TV area, Juan Gonzalez and Pudge Rodriguez were really, really big. Coupled with Nolan Ryan signing with the team, it was a really fun time to watch the Rangers. At the time, Gonzalez was huge at card shows. All of my friends wanted to pull him about as much as they wanted to pull the other big stars. He had a series of big years. Albert Belle was a beast, and put up some unreal numbers. The media hated him, and so he didn't get the superstar treatment that a lot of other guys on your list did. But he was a blast to watch play. Personally, I think that both Gonzalez and Belle have to be part of your list of early 90's rookies who were huge at the time.
kevin
Quite possibly. Both were very good. As you see from earlier posts, the roid issues, whether true or not, seem to hinder the value of the cards. Juan was probably one of the ones believed to have done it. So that may somewhat detract from his accomplishments for some people. I have several Juan BGS 10's in my collection and they are decent sellers with decent values.
Ultimately it comes down to who and what you believe. My opinion is, i don't care, i go by what they did on the field. Baseball is a skill game. Arnold S may have been able to crush Nolan ryan in a fight, but he probably couldn't throw a baseball 100 mph or probably couldn't have thrown a 40 mph strike.
The $$$ behind sports make people do things in the short term in order to keep playing. While I have no proof anyone has taken them (and canseco's book could be true, could be partly true or could be full of crap -- he didn't know what the how league was doing), that doesn't mean they didn't. When I started the post I was comparing stats and accomplishments and that's were it should stay, not speculating with who may or may not have done them because none of us really know.
I agree, I am not real big on WAR. Good on Harmon for making the positional change for the betterment of the team. from all i have read and heard, he was a very good person.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
both were fantastic offensive players. they also had great RBI numbers, but we all know now that RBI's dont count as "real" stats anymore...
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
It's very unfortunate that PED's and the over hanging PED cloud have kept the 80 and 90's players card's from ever reaching their potential. Even is this thread Frank's name was drug in
BTW Frank, Cal, Rickey, etc. didn't get mentioned in the Mitchell report.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
In just everyday life there are many items that come out that turn out to be false and some that don't come out for years that do turnout to be true.
Going back to the 40's and 50's a guy named Ted Williams was frowned upon by the media, he never did anything wrong and was a great player. But the media dislike caused him to be left out of several MVP discussions. And they tarnished his image as much as they could.
And there are many other cases where the public was told someone did nothing wrong but in fact did. I believe we are told that certain people did PED's and others didn't may have something to do with how they got along with the media. Maybe not in every case but in many.
I myself - think many have done it and still do it. too much $$$ involved. When your options are making millions or being unemployed, the logical choice is the cash. By 30 years old most players are not around any longer, then what?
>
>
>
When you compare stats and accomplishments from this era, steroids are going to become part of the discussion.
You obviously haven't read Canseco's book. I did, and at first found it rather hard to believe until almost every single guy he claimed he had knowledge of using steroids were eventually caught, or admitted to using.
A lot of people don't seem to care, but I think it was a horrible period for the MLB.
I think its possible more do it now than ever. There is no testing. So if you are up for a new contract and there is no testing, hmm, could someone possibly be incentivized to take something that may earn them another 100 150 200 million that could have their great great great grandkids living a life of luxury? I would offer yes. Not everyone would but clear motivation is there.
I find it funny but irritating that the media tries to say this person is clean or this is the true holder of a record. They dont know we dont know. The only way you know is if someone tests positive. If they dont test positive you still dont know. Not getting caught does not mean innocence. I think there are a lot of players where people are close to certain they did but the official MLB positive test smoking gun does not exist. Think those tests were probably very beatable. And now, they dont test at all. So everyone looks innocent. No failed tests when there is no testing. Everyone is innocent!
I'd say if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck its probably a duck. We dont know. But a guy's slugging percentage improves by 100 or 150 points to me that is a duck. I appreciated Brady Anderson Luis Gonzalez but the guys that look like glove first speed OFs with modest power and one day wake up and are 50 HR guys, I dont know. Raises an eyebrow.
I did find it funny that Frank Thomas was so openly outspoken against players taking anything and then retires and does commercials about boosting testosterone.
I think most of the players took them. i think they still do. look at lebron, you think he just lifts a few weights and goes to the gym and shoots a few 3's? im sure canseco was right, don't doubt it. go back and look at the early cards of trout harper ohtani, etc, and then look at them now. juan soto is another one.
joe i know it sucks and we want our favorite players to do the right thing, but a lot of them don't and haven't. it's been about 20 years since all this blew up, and it's hard to believe it just went away with a snap of a finger.
thats why i just focus on what we know. if we knew more we may never watch sports again, who knows.
ulysses - great post. when i played college football i had to do 4 drug tests in a row, you know why, because they knew i wasn't taking them. the ones that were and who had to test, had other guys pee for them and brought it with them to the test or the team just wouldn't test them at all. and then they told us it was "random. bull crap.
Dang, already over 30 years. Fleer was pretty good back then with the "chasers".... Rookie Sensations, Team Leaders, All-Star, Gold Leaf Rookies. Fun times: rip, rip, rip. I remember getting so pissed for not pulling a Thomas Rookie Sensation that I paid $40 for one. Pretty sure I still have it in a garbage box. Biggio, Alomar (spitter) no fanfare from that era for HOF players. Palmeiro, Sheffield, Sosa (he's lightened up) also pretty big then, but tainted careers.
The Mitchell report was ridiculous. do you know that there were only 5 people interviewed for the mitchell report? and only 2 of them were players! here is where all the "evidence" came from for the Mitchell report:
1. Kirk Radonski, bat boy, clubhouse attendant
2. Brian McNamee, trainer
3. Larry Starr, trainer
4. Jason Giambi, player
5. Frank Thomas, player.
and that is why so many player did NOT get mentioned. the vast majority of teams were not investigated/interviewed.
the Mitchell report was a farce.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I think that the VAST majority of player past and present have either used PED's of their era or cheated in some way. most do not get caught.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.