Options
in the late 70's into the 80's there a number of very good players/rookie cards
olb31
Posts: 2,955 ✭✭✭✭✭
that existed during that time. For instance, Pedro Guerrero, Sax/Marshall, butler/benedict and on and on. These guys were very good players and I'm sure some of you can name many more for that time. These cards sale for almost nothing. PSA 10's are around $25 - $30. It's real interesting that people will speculate $4,000 on Baker Mayfield or the latest Yankee hopeful, but solid players like this are basically worthless. Brett Butler was one of the all-time best leadoff hitters, but gets absolutely no respect from the collecting world. Just an FYI.
Work hard and you will succeed!!
0
Comments
They're talking about you big guy.
Only $27.49 +shipping. Get yours on Ebay now, while supplies last.
Getting ready for some of that good ole Dave Kingman should be in the HoF chat.
I knew Dave was gonna make an appearance 😂. You suck DD, and I say that with
I don't seek out graded cards and have only a "handful" in my collection. However, I enjoy cards like those you describe in raw form.
Is it that they seem to sell for very little and that is bad? If you are a buyer, you should like that. However, you would also need to recognize that they will likely not exponentionally increase in value either, so as a seller, that is bad. It's a shame they don't have more appeal means that they aren't worth enough to care about to a lot of "collectors".
Willie McGee, Dale Murphy. 1982 is full of them: Kent Hrbek, Chili Davis, Lee Smith, Dave Stewart, Brett Butler (already mentioned), Von Hayes, Tom Brunansky, Terry Francona, Steve Balboni, etc...
>
Successful transactions on the BST boards with rtimmer, coincoins, gerard, tincup, tjm965, MMR, mission16, dirtygoldman, AUandAG, deadmunny, thedutymon, leadoff4, Kid4HOF03, BRI2327, colebear, mcholke, rpcolettrane, rockdjrw, publius, quik, kalinefan, Allen, JackWESQ, CON40, Griffeyfan2430, blue227, Tiggs2012, ndleo, CDsNuts, ve3rules, doh, MurphDawg, tennessebanker, and gene1978.
You just made a grown man in California cry.
Edited to add: Of course I'm speaking of our very own Geordie (TNP777)
Dale Murphy kinda seems like a Don Mattingly. He was super popular in the 80's (heck, even Donruss eternally memorialized him with the highest printed baseball card issue in history) and put up some strong, sound numbers. Was one of the most reliable producers on a bad team for a lot of years. Big name in the 80's, strong popularity on his cards (though less than the epic 84 Donruss Mattingly, admittedly) but no HOF love.
Wonder if the veterans committee will eventually let either or both of them in?
kevin
If 80's cards were not so over produced you might actually see value in some of these rookies. It's all about supply and demand.
Without actually looking at WAR and all that, my first thought is that murphy has a better HOF resume than mattingly.
Yaz Master Set
#1 Gino Cappelletti master set
#1 John Hannah master set
Also collecting Andre Tippett, Patriots Greats' RCs, 1964 Venezuelan Topps, 1974 Topps Red Sox
Murphy will get in one day I believe.
He wasn’t the greatest but VERY good, and I believe back to back MVPs (77-78?) and an annual All Star. One of the best OF and hitters of his era....and I’m not a Murph fan.
Parallels to Chipper in some ways.
After the Baines/Smith selections, anyone who meets the absolute minimum requirements to enter the HOF has a shot via Veterans. Between Murphy/Mattingly, I agree Murphy has the better resume, but think Mattingly has a better shot of making it in before him, being a Yank and staying relevant with his managing (even with an atrocious team). It's hard to honestly view the HOF as little more than a glorified popularity contest on the fringes.
They all had to stop and watch when Big Daddy Kingman stepped up to the plate to bat....
You're thinking of his rookie cards.
Murphy was a superstar from 82-87, Mattingly from 84-87. Not much for either outside of those years. I don't believe that is enough to deserve HoF status. Neither is close to the best at his position who is not enshrined.
I don't need a Hall of Fame to tell me who was famous in the late '70s and '80s. My memories of that time period will never be altered by what the HOF deems the best, greatest, etc. Watching some of the guys mentioned above will forever be tattooed on my mind. Kirk Gibson, for instance, will always be a heroic player for me. Hrbek Gaetti Viola. Murphy Hershiser Mattingly. These kinds of guys are my Hall of Fame no matter the argument against them.
Andy
And this, of course, is a big argument. If we're going to put one of the two in the HoF, admitting that neither is an all-time great but that both are among the best eligible starting pitchers not (yet) enshrined, who do you choose? Charlie Buffington or Kevin Brown? Buffington was indisputably better by objective measures, but who remembers him? Are we enshrining baseball history, or are we acknowledging fame? A similar comparison, if you wish to argue that the game has changed so much since Buffington's day, how about between King Kong Keller and Albert Belle?
Dwight Evans > Dale Murphy > Don Mattingly. I like all 3. All 3 very, very good players and when fully on were great. Having said that if all 3 were to get elected the order would be, in my opinion, 1. Mattingly 2. Murphy 3. Evans
I loved Dewey!
Yaz Master Set
#1 Gino Cappelletti master set
#1 John Hannah master set
Also collecting Andre Tippett, Patriots Greats' RCs, 1964 Venezuelan Topps, 1974 Topps Red Sox
I had to go back and watch some old King Kong Kingman games. Man, he didn’t hit cheap homers. I forgot that he played for Oakland. He hit a monster homer off Clemens in 1986.
Thurman munson should be in the hof
mhm always liked munson . any chance of maris getting in one day?
The correct answer is after the Veteran's Committee selections the last few years no one, except possibly Committee members understands who is likely and who isn't. Remember, Baines peaked at 6.1% of the BBWAA vote, so it's not like he had a lot of support a year ago.
I don't think there is any chance for Maris. I would imagine a much better chance for Mattingly, Murphy, and maybe Evans. I don't see Kingman ever getting in. He was awesome to watch. But doesn't have the numbers. Of course, I think that we may be in an era where what qualifies as "HOF worthy" numbers starts changing. Specifically for pitchers, when will we (if ever) have another 300 game winner? That is 15+ wins a year for 20 years!!! How many guys have had at least 15 wins in the last three straight years, let alone a decade plus? There are tons of pitchers right now who serve critical roles for teams, but who (because of the way pitchers are managed) will never have several hundred saves, will never have 300 wins, will never have 3000 strikeouts. Likewise, it seems like the number of guys who have at least 300-400 career home runs has gone up, compared to HOF numbers circa 1950-1980. There are still a few getting 3000 hits, but it seems like that has slowed down as well.
kevin
the hof has way too many "good" players already . i think you could remove 25% of them and nobody would know or care.
Not necessarily a guarantee, but Verlander certainly has a likely chance of getting to 300 wins. He has the competitive drive to keep playing for another 5 years and his individual skill luckily matched up with being rostered on high achieving teams which definitely contributes in converting starts to being wins. That should be enough to get him over 300 if he avoids injury. He's already passed 3,000 K's.
Excellent point. He does have a chance. But gone are the days where there was a new 300 game winner every few years. I was just looking at the stats, and in 1986 (after June when Sutton got his 300th) there were 4 active 300 game winners who were still pitching after their 300th win -- Seaver, Sutton, Niekro, and Carlton. Bet that never happens again.
kevin
Agreed, true enough. Some statistical milestones may very well become conceptually obsolete as their relevancy may trend towards previous era ball rather than the way the modern game is played. Similarly, there are records that will never be broken because of the style and strategy of play, rather than the players' ability/skill/longevity to do so. For example, what I believe to be the most unbreakable of all baseball records, career and single-season leader in complete games (for a pitcher of course), will remain in the record books with no challengers primarily because it is not the way the game is played anymore even though there may have been guys who could have put up similar numbers if they had played many years ago instead of in more modern times.
Verlander might be the last 300 game winner, and will move up relatively higher on the career strikeouts list too.
I'd be curious to see a vintage vs. modern pitching statistical comparison of strikeouts per batter faced, tabulating the greats of the past vs. the star starters from today.
Having Kate Upton at home in bed waiting for me would be enough for me to call it a career.
I always thought the Topps Burger King 1978 Detroit Tiger set would be worth a fortune by now. It had Trammell, Whitaker and Morris individual rookie cards which I thought were way better than the foursome rookie cards in the base set. Here's a future veteran's committee inductee - guaranteed now that Trammell's in.
As a life-long Michigan native, totally agree. Not that he is in the HOF discussion, but, gotta also give a mention for fan favorite Lance Parrish in that set as well (and better than his 4-player version, just like the other guys you listed)
Murphy, Dave Parker, and Steve Garvey were all MVP winners and very popular. I think all 3 should be in the hall before Baines.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Well, it's too late to put any of them in before Baines now.