Williams or Mays?
Yankeehero74
Posts: 139
If you had the choice between a Ted Williams signed baseball or Mays signed baseball which would you rather have?
0
Comments
<< <i>Ted Williams by a landslide. Deceased vs. alive. Beautiful signature vs. awful one. And better of the two ballplayers. Not even close. >>
+.406
Topps/OPC Hockey 1966-Present base sets
PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 80.51% Complete)
PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.80% Complete)
PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
Rather have Williams ball. Beautiful signature. Lots of stories on Mays being very fan UN friendly.
Joe
Dave
IMF
Mays Yes
Barry
<< <i>Williams was a MUCH better hitter. Mays the Much better fielder. If Williams doesn't miss 5 or so prime years serving in military his offensive stats would be staggering. >>
Exactly.
I have a Teddy Ballgame signed by him for my father in person at Ted Williams Baseball camp Summer of 1960.
<< <i>No question the Williams ball is more valuable. But let's not kid ourselves, dead or not, he signed a lot. >>
Absolutely -- probably both are currently stockpiled in a warehouse.
So get one of each --they're never going to be really valuable or expensive.
DaveB in St.Louis
<< <i>Ted Williams by a landslide. Deceased vs. alive. Beautiful signature vs. awful one. And better of the two ballplayers. Not even close. >>
Agreed.
<< <i>Williams may be the better autograph, but Mays was the superior player. To start, he did something known as field.
It actually surprised me someone would rank Williams higher. Mays is commonly ranked as the second best player ever, after Ruth. >>
Respectfully disagree. Many folks don't rank Mays higher than Williams and others. I would not use commonly to describe your latter statement.
Justin
Retired - Eddie Mathews Master Registry Set (96.36%) Rank 1
To answer the debate - Mays was the better player
To start a new debate - I'm not sure what is more shocking about that list of top 100 players. That someone named Oscar Charleston is higher than someone named Cobb or that Mcgwire is ahead of Jackie Robinson, Pete Rose and Tom Seaver, to name a few.
And as far as Ted as a fielder, he is not nearly as bad as people make him out to me. Ted's fielding percentage for his career was .974, where as Mays fielding percentage was .981. There was not that big of a difference.
Yes, Willie made some incredible plays, but an out is an out, no matter how fancy the play was you made. Now I'm not saying Ted was a better fielder than Willie, I'm saying Ted is not as bad as people seem to think he was.
<< <i>To answer your question - Williams ball
To answer the debate - Mays was the better player
To start a new debate - I'm not sure what is more shocking about that list of top 100 players. That someone named Oscar Charleston is higher than someone named Cobb or that Mcgwire is ahead of Jackie Robinson, Pete Rose and Tom Seaver, to name a few. >>
One thing that jumped out to me about that list is how low Ken Griffey Jr. was ranked. Also, regarding McGwire, I think that list came out around the year 2000, before anyone knew McGwire & company were juicing.
<< <i>Mays - sent him a card to the NYMets when I was a kid. Came back signed about 10 years ago. Sports Auto Mag ran article of fakes, clubhouse, secretary. Pretty sure the Mays is a secretary or wife.
Mays Yes
Barry >>
Am I reading this right - you sent Willie a card in 1972 or 1973 TTM when he was with the Mets and it arrived in 2003? A 30 year TTM!!! That is the most amazing thing about this thread.
Give me Williams (for my Rangers collection
What I'm selling
Building Sets, Collecting Texas Rangers, and Texas Tech Red Raiders
I already have a Mays that I had signed as a kid at a card show by him. When I was in high school I went to card shows with hopes of getting every 500 HR hitter's Auto on a single ball and one ball with all the sigs. At the time the living 500 HR club was Aaron, Mays, Mantle, Williams, Matthews, Killebrew, Jackson, Robinson, McCovey, Schmidt, Banks. Before it got watered down by the steroid era. The only guy who never made it to the west coast for a autograph signing that I could get was Williams. So Williams wins by a landslide for me as I won't have that chance now. I just retrieved those signed balls from my old room in my parents' house a few years back.
As far as the better player debate. I don't think you can say either is definitively better than the other. You can make debates either way. Williams certainly could be the best hitter of all time as well as a great patriot and all around bad***. If he didn't miss time serving in two wars who knows what his counting stats would be? Certainly any advanced metric that takes into account numbers of games played and total statistics would not measure his true greatness due to his service time during the wars. On the other hand, Williams played in Fenway which is very hitter friendly while Mays accrued most of his stats in two of the most pitcher friendly parks of all time, the Polo Grounds and Candlestick park. He was also by most subjective and objective measures the better fielder and baserunner. So I think the argument can certainly be made either way.
<< <i>The guy who served his country during his prime. >>
To be fair, Mays lost almost 2 seasons serving his country during the Korean War. I don't think he was quite as active as Ted, but Willie was drafted and he did his duty.
And I'd also rather have the Ted Williams ball by a landslide.
"It can never be said that Fenway Park, with the most distant right field in the majors, was built for Ted Williams."
Fenway park did not give Williams any advantage. Ted was a dead pull hitter who refused to change that style of hitting even when the defense played 6 players to the right of second base.
I will also make the claim that while Mays was a better defensive player and you could say "all around" player, I think Williams is a more VALUABLE overall player as his offensive contributions when compared to Mays' outweighs Willies defensive advantage.
Sort of like comparing Killebrew to Puckett. Puckett could do it all, but Killebrew's offensive contributions makes him the "better" player.
Joe
WHAT?
Dave
<< <i>Williams was a MUCH better hitter. Mays the Much better fielder. If Williams doesn't miss 5 or so prime years serving in military his offensive stats would be staggering.
Rather have Williams ball. Beautiful signature. Lots of stories on Mays being very fan UN friendly.
Joe >>
And Williams was friendly???
Williams hated the sportswriters and did get upset with being booed, which he did address and explain. After his retirement, he was very fan friendly, even to the point of being associated with a baseball camp.
Willie seemed to be great during his playing days, happy and friendly on the outside, but he has a very poor reputation in dealing with fans, even at signings where he is paid to interact just a little with people who adore him.
Your point is well taken though, if we weren't discussing the signed ball, I would nOt have brought it up in comparing the two players abilities.
Joe
<< <i>Ted Williams will always get my vote.
And as far as Ted as a fielder, he is not nearly as bad as people make him out to me. Ted's fielding percentage for his career was .974, where as Mays fielding percentage was .981. There was not that big of a difference.
Fielding %? Are you serious? It's tough to make an error if you cannot get to the ball. Remember Mays played a far more demanding position.
<< <i>From the book "Who's Better Who's Best in Baseball" by Elliot Kalb.
"It can never be said that Fenway Park, with the most distant right field in the majors, was built for Ted Williams."
Fenway park did not give Williams any advantage. Ted was a dead pull hitter who refused to change that style of hitting even when the defense played 6 players to the right of second base.
I will also make the claim that while Mays was a better defensive player and you could say "all around" player, I think Williams is a more VALUABLE overall player as his offensive contributions when compared to Mays' outweighs Willies defensive advantage.
Sort of like comparing Killebrew to Puckett. Puckett could do it all, but Killebrew's offensive contributions makes him the "better" player.
Joe >>
Well stated.
<< <i>To answer your question - Williams ball
To answer the debate - Mays was the better player
To start a new debate - I'm not sure what is more shocking about that list of top 100 players. That someone named Oscar Charleston is higher than someone named Cobb or that Mcgwire is ahead of Jackie Robinson, Pete Rose and Tom Seaver, to name a few. >>
Rose's stats were not all that great except for the longevity. His OBP is something like 200th all time, and he had little power. Note that Raines' OPS+ is higher than that of Rose. He would be an easy HOFer if not for the gambling, but McGwire was a much better run producer, which is what it's all about. His OPS+ 13th all time. What's your complaint about Charleston? Why do you think he is overrated?
Given the choice between a Mays signed ball, Williams signed ball, and a signed ball of a far lesser player such as Goose Goslin, I am taking Goslin.
The value is in supply. Mays autographs are like new cars. His signature loses value the minute after you pay his signing fee and receive his signature.
<< <i>What does player's ability have to do with anything.
Given the choice between a Mays signed ball, Williams signed ball, and a signed ball of a far lesser player such as Goose Goslin, I am taking Goslin.
The value is in supply. Mays autographs are like new cars. His signature loses value the minute after you pay his signing fee and receive his signature. >>
I must respectfully disagree, first of all, in general, the players ability is why his signed items have any value in the first place, the value is in DEMAND. If demand is high the price will always be high, regardless of supply. When demand is high and supply is low, then you have the most value. Demand is the key here.
When you bring up Goslin, you are changing the entire OP's post. His balls seem to be impossible to find, he was a hall of Fame ballplayer. Both Williams and Mays balls are in supply and roughly the same era.
Joe
<< <i>
<< <i>What does player's ability have to do with anything.
Given the choice between a Mays signed ball, Williams signed ball, and a signed ball of a far lesser player such as Goose Goslin, I am taking Goslin.
The value is in supply. Mays autographs are like new cars. His signature loses value the minute after you pay his signing fee and receive his signature. >>
I must respectfully disagree, first of all, in general, the players ability is why his signed items have any value in the first place, the value is in DEMAND. If demand is high the price will always be high, regardless of supply. When demand is high and supply is low, then you have the most value. Demand is the key here.
When you bring up Goslin, you are changing the entire OP's post. His balls seem to be impossible to find, he was a hall of Fame ballplayer. Both Williams and Mays balls are in supply and roughly the same era.
Joe >>
Not really. The thread turned into which was the better player. Bringing Goslin into the mix proves the point that a player's ability is not necessarily tied to which is the better autograph to have. And any baseball autograph collector will take a Goslin ball over the other two.
As far as supply goes, which ball will have the higher sale price: 10 people looking to buy 1 available Goslin ball or 1000 people looking to buy 500 Mays balls. The sale price of the one Goslin ball will greatly exceed any one of the 500 Mays balls. In fact, I would argue it would take about 20 Mays balls to equal the price of 1 Goslin ball.
But going back to the OP's question, if prices are close to equal I am taking Williams. There has to be at least 2, maybe 3 Mays balls for every 1 Williams ball. If prices are market rate, I am taking Mays. Much cheaper and generally considered a better overall player.
<< <i>Vin Scully says Mays best ballplayer he ever saw. That pretty much seals it for me. >>
I'm surprised Scully never saw Williams play. Did he only announce National League games?
http://www.unisquare.com/store/brick/
Ralph
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>What does player's ability have to do with anything.
Given the choice between a Mays signed ball, Williams signed ball, and a signed ball of a far lesser player such as Goose Goslin, I am taking Goslin.
The value is in supply. Mays autographs are like new cars. His signature loses value the minute after you pay his signing fee and receive his signature. >>
I must respectfully disagree, first of all, in general, the players ability is why his signed items have any value in the first place, the value is in DEMAND. If demand is high the price will always be high, regardless of supply. When demand is high and supply is low, then you have the most value. Demand is the key here.
When you bring up Goslin, you are changing the entire OP's post. His balls seem to be impossible to find, he was a hall of Fame ballplayer. Both Williams and Mays balls are in supply and roughly the same era.
Joe >>
Not really. The thread turned into which was the better player. Bringing Goslin into the mix proves the point that a player's ability is not necessarily tied to which is the better autograph to have. And any baseball autograph collector will take a Goslin ball over the other two.
As far as supply goes, which ball will have the higher sale price: 10 people looking to buy 1 available Goslin ball or 1000 people looking to buy 500 Mays balls. The sale price of the one Goslin ball will greatly exceed any one of the 500 Mays balls. In fact, I would argue it would take about 20 Mays balls to equal the price of 1 Goslin ball.
But going back to the OP's question, if prices are close to equal I am taking Williams. There has to be at least 2, maybe 3 Mays balls for every 1 Williams ball. If prices are market rate, I am taking Mays. Much cheaper and generally considered a better overall player. >>
OP never brought up a third player when discussing signed balls, you did. Why not bring up Joe Jackson? Now there's a valuable ball!!!! He's not even in the HOF!!!
Lightningboy, bringing up a new debate, mentioned other players only in the context of rating players on a top 100 list which is again, not part of this topic and would be a separate thread.
As long as we're at it, I'll ask what's a better car to have, '64 Mustang or '69 Camaro and you can bring up the first Ferrari ever made!
The question referred to; two items with similar supply, of two players of similar talent, that played in similar times. Goslin simply cannot be brought into it. There are virtually no signed balls out there to purchase, he played in a much earlier time, and he was not the equal to either player, although he is a HOF'er.
And YES, a Goslin ball is worth more than Mays or Williams, as are many players. Obviously, a players ability is only one of the factors involved in the value of that players collectibles, again why bring up such an obvious point?
Joe
<< <i>
<< <i>Vin Scully says Mays best ballplayer he ever saw. That pretty much seals it for me. >>
I'm surprised Scully never saw Williams play. Did he only announce National League games? >>
You sir are the BEST!
Joe