What would happen to card prices IF Griffey Jr. tested + for 'Roids?
Mintacular
Posts: 1,138 ✭✭✭
I think the one of the quickest ways star rookie cards during the Steroid Era to rebound, or at the very least stop their daily slide, is for "The Kid" Ken Griffey Jr. to test positive for 'roids or PEDs.
While the thought is a tough one to swallow--from a FINANCIAL standpoint ONLY--it might help bump prices of the others as such a revelation would force fans to acknowledge that even the best/nicest athletes were swept up in the scandal.
As a result, perhaps some kind of reconciliation between the American public/MLB could occur and collectors might cast a more forgiving eye to stars like Arod, Sosa, etc. Who knows, maybe these fans would even plunk down a few bucks for one of their rookie cards?
In short, do you think a Griffey Jr. positive test could stop the slide of rookie card prices for the other star players that have recently been caught? That is my question.
While the thought is a tough one to swallow--from a FINANCIAL standpoint ONLY--it might help bump prices of the others as such a revelation would force fans to acknowledge that even the best/nicest athletes were swept up in the scandal.
As a result, perhaps some kind of reconciliation between the American public/MLB could occur and collectors might cast a more forgiving eye to stars like Arod, Sosa, etc. Who knows, maybe these fans would even plunk down a few bucks for one of their rookie cards?
In short, do you think a Griffey Jr. positive test could stop the slide of rookie card prices for the other star players that have recently been caught? That is my question.
0
Comments
Look at me everyone! Look at me!
<< <i>I think the one of the quickest ways star rookie cards during the Steroid Era to rebound, or at the very least stop their daily slide, is for "The Kid" Ken Griffey Jr. to test positive for 'roids or PEDs.
While the thought is a tough one to swallow--from a FINANCIAL standpoint ONLY--it might help bump prices of the others as such a revelation would force fans to acknowledge that even the best/nicest athletes were swept up in the scandal.
As a result, perhaps some kind of reconciliation between the American public/MLB could occur and collectors might cast a more forgiving eye to stars like Arod, Sosa, etc. Who knows, maybe these fans would even plunk down a few bucks for one of their rookie cards?
In short, do you think a Griffey Jr. positive test could stop the slide of rookie card prices for the other star players that have recently been caught? That is my question. >>
My personal opinion is that it would do the opposite. I do see your point, however, I think that Griffey rookies would take a nose dive and the others would see no spike. One of the main reasons for this is the mass production of most of those rookie cards. Just imagine if those players (McGwire, Sosa, Bonds, etc) didn't take PED's and if their rookie cards were not mass produced.
Shane
I'm sorry, failed "investments" of the suckling masses isn't a good reason to want to tarnish the career of a legend.
Beyond that; I do agree that if Jr. were to be found to have tested positive in the past, Jr. collectors would be very forgiving and the whole generation would receive an even larger pass than before.
I just hope Frank Thomas is one day recognized for his hard work on and off the field to combat PEDs...he doesn't get the respect he deserves in my opinion.
Sosa and McGwire were two of the most beloved players in the game until the steroid issue came to light. How much are their cards worth now?
You are an idiot.
<< <i>I think the one of the quickest ways star rookie cards during the Steroid Era to rebound, or at the very least stop their daily slide, is for "The Kid" Ken Griffey Jr. to test positive for 'roids or PEDs.
While the thought is a tough one to swallow--from a FINANCIAL standpoint ONLY--it might help bump prices of the others as such a revelation would force fans to acknowledge that even the best/nicest athletes were swept up in the scandal.
As a result, perhaps some kind of reconciliation between the American public/MLB could occur and collectors might cast a more forgiving eye to stars like Arod, Sosa, etc. Who knows, maybe these fans would even plunk down a few bucks for one of their rookie cards?
In short, do you think a Griffey Jr. positive test could stop the slide of rookie card prices for the other star players that have recently been caught? That is my question. >>
Stupid worthless thread
We all know the issue of overproduction is more of a threat than the steroids but steroid use is still a close 2nd for why prices keep getting dragged down.
Again, I am not saying that a positive test would be worth losing a baseball legend because card values of others might go up, so don't twist my words please.
Short of starting a nationwide 80's baseball card bonfire day (which would be great idea BTW)--the issue of overproduction is not solvable.
However, the impact of steroids could be blunted. All I'm saying is that the quickest way towards that end would be if the game's biggest and most beloved star tested positive as much as the pains me to think about...
I think if the remaining "clean" stars of the generation were to become dirty, the casual '80s/'90s collectors would give up on them completely...leaving only player collectors who are in short supply comparatively.
Perhaps in some kind of selfish way I do "wish" this but ONLY on the grounds that a bunch of my other rookie cards from this era could stabilize and those stars players like Bonds could be seen a more reasonable light.
It's a shame but maybe a Griffey Jr. positive test would be the quickest way for this to happen as I can see no other way for fans to bury the hatchet with players of this era other than the game's biggest star "coming clean" (assuming he broke that rule...)
<< <i>My personal opinion is that it would do the opposite. I do see your point, however, I think that Griffey rookies would take a nose dive and the others would see no spike. One of the main reasons for this is the mass production of most of those rookie cards. Just imagine if those players (McGwire, Sosa, Bonds, etc) didn't take PED's and if their rookie cards were not mass produced. >>
The point is that McGwire and Sosa cards were mass produced but still sold for $10-$50 DESPITE the unfortunate over-production issue. Their RC prices really only nose-dived when steroid allegations cropped up.
<< <i>The point is that McGwire and Sosa cards were mass produced but still sold for $10-$50 DESPITE the unfortunate over-production issue. Their RC prices really only nose-dived when steroid allegations cropped up. >>
How much do Tom Glavine and Barry Larkin cards sell for? I'll sell all of mine to you for $1 to $5 each. That's 10% of pre-steroid accusations of McGwire and Sosa cards, so it must be a great deal, right?
<< <i>What does Geronimo say when he jumps out of a plane? >>
"God, I hope this parachute still works"?
<< <i>How much do Tom Glavine and Barry Larkin cards sell for? I'll sell all of mine to you for $1 to $5 each. >>
What's your point? Glavine cards are low because he has no nice premium rookie and Larkin will not make the HOF. Bad examples to support your point which is...Oh wait, what was your point?
<< <i>Oh wait, what was your point? >>
No, what was your point?
1985 Topps and 1990 Leaf aren't exactly "premium" either. NM/MT commons are less than a penny each in bulk
The point is, drug use has very little do with baseball card values and there is very little that could happen to increase the value of any cards from those years
Steve
Brian
Brian
<< <i>What if Mintacular was a pack searcher or a resealer? >>
--You would probably like that because then you would have a leg to stand on when attacking me incessantly but now you just look like an instigator.
Anyway, the Hall of Fame does matter for card values--anybody that has been collecting cards knows that very simple fact. Yes, there are a few exceptions to the rule: Rose, Maris, etc. and maybe even Larkin (although I think not). By that era's card standards the '85 Topps USA McGwire and '90 Leaf are considered a bit more "premium"--justified or not.
<< <i>The point is, drug use has very little do with baseball card values and there is very little that could happen to increase the value of any cards from those years >>
Absolutely not true. Look at AROD cards. A Year ago those '94 SPs were selling for $150, today they are around $50....
<< <i>--You would probably like that because then you would have a leg to stand on when attacking me incessantly but now you just look like an instigator. >>
From yesterday's meaningless thread:
<< <i>Thank you to the posters who responded in earnest--some good ideas in there after sifting through the other backwash. And a big SCREW YOU to everyone else--I will conquer the card world with or without your advice. (They need a middle finger emoticon). >>
Who's the instigator?
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys -
Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2
touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys
defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL
title.
<< <i>
<< <i>What if Mintacular was a pack searcher or a resealer? >>
--You would probably like that because then you would have a leg to stand on when attacking me incessantly but now you just look like an instigator. >>
Not attacking you. Just wanted to throw in a couple of worthless responses to a worthless thread.
I personally don't like speculation threads that involve players like Griffey possibly testing positive for PED's.
Nothing against you. It just seems you have to start a thread all the time.
Good luck,
Brian
I don't know why you guys keep throwing out this "worthless" charge all the time. You know what my background is, you know the type of discussions I pose, you know by collecting experience, and if the threads are indeed "worthless" to you, then the posters will respond accordingly by ignoring them and I don't think posting 1 thread a day is excessive and I usually don't even do that.
Bill-defending myself is not instigating and yes there are some people on this board that have earned the big SCREW YOU, IMO.
The point worth discussion seems to be, is there a point at which whatever modern-card collector are left in the market will forgive and forget the alleged transgressions of those PED users who were unfortunate enough to catch the early spotlight for their misdeeds? Would that point be if Griffey were found to have been an abuser? Ripken? Ryan?
Or will it take a couple of generations and a few books and movies? Look at the demand/values for career-contemporary cards of the Black Sox. In almost every set, Joe Jackson outsells Babe Ruth, and guysd like Chick Gandil, Ed Cicotte and the rest are priced at or above the Hall of Famers.
Or is it simply that every mainstream card produced since 1981 exists in far greater supply than will ever support future price appreciation among a diminished collector base?
As you probably know by now, I enjoy a spirited debate on this forum and while I may not agree with any poster's viewpoint, I will defend his right to express that viewpoint (within the written and unwritten rules). We are all free to skip over those threads originated by any person whose opinions we feel are unowrthy of our time and attention.
Always looking for Chipper Jones cards.
Im a very focused collector of cards from 1909 - 2012...LOL
<< <i>Well you can always take that 5000 bucks you want to invest and start a "tested positive" registry set >>
If your IQ was 128 or above , you might be considered "very superior " . From 120-127 , you might be considered only "superior " as opposed to "very superior " . At 111-119 , you might be considered "bright normal " , but clearly not in the above mentioned "superior "version . Most of us might fall into the next catogory of " average " , which denotes an IQ of 91-110 . We then "dull normal " at the range of 80-90 . Next follows "borderline " at 66-79 . Then finishing up the lot is the group classified as " Defective " , which falls into the range of 65 and below .
For many years there were actual terms that were used for these groups of IQ classifications , that came out of favor largely to the obvious disparity when applied to different cultures , that was easily observed and easily measured on almost any type of tests. , in this country .
Am idiot was anyone whose IQ was measured less than 20 .
An imbecile was anyone in the IQ range of 20-49.
A moron was again anyone in the range of 50- 69.
A person was considered borderline deficient at 70-80.
I have no idea where I fall in these lists . I believe my mother-in-law has easily earned a title from the most resent list .
I used to have in my lines below , that a person's deed's ( and or ideas) and the value of their deeds ( and or ideas ) said an awful lot about them . At some point in most people's lives , there might be some "honest / and or truthful " soul searching to see where we are at .
Good luck Pat--- Sonny
Calaban--I am very proud that you are brave enough to share with the forum what we always knew about you but did not want to say out loud. Despite your low IQ level, you will never be an "idiot" in my book
<< <i>Or is it simply that every mainstream card produced since 1981 exists in far greater supply than will ever support future price appreciation among a diminished collector base? >>
That is it. If people like cards from the past 20 years, great for them, because the supply is so high and the demand is so low, it never has to cost you very much to enjoy many of them
The greats weren't users of any performance enhancing drugs, and it bothers me when the old records fall to the users.
<< <i>I think some of you are being a little hard the kid, here. He broached a legitimate topic related to current card values, if not exactly in the most diplomatic language.
>>
I don't disagree Bob; I've never given the guy anything but the benefit of my doubt, and I responded with a valid, honest answer...one with which he thought I was attacking him, though it was a direct response.
I will continue to treat him the same way I always have, but lashing out at valid comments will always garner him flack from many.
Only an idiot would have a message board signature.
<< <i>What if "the greats" had easy access to PEDs and MLB did not enforce/punish these users? Ty Cobb would've had a needle in arm before you can say "Jalapeno Hannah!" >>
Useless.
When it comes to PED's, you either did them, or did not do them.
Whether or not someone who lived before PEDs existed may have taken them if given the chance is totally immaterial.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>
Perhaps in some kind of selfish way I do "wish" this but ONLY on the grounds that a bunch of my other rookie cards from this era could stabilize and those stars players like Bonds could be seen a more reasonable light.
>>
Am I the only one here to be disgusted when reading this paragraph? Bonds be seen in a more reasonable light??? The guy who broke the most beloved records in baseball, and a-hole to the press and public, liar, cheater, etc etc
What on earth is reasonable about Bonds????
As for Bonds, the bottom line really is that nobody REALLY knows what he is like. Watching him on TV does not mean we really know who he is.
Even if he TRULY is a jerk (which is probable) that does not change the fact that he was the best player of his generation.