Mike Trout

Photos: Fronts and backs of my 2011 Mike Trout Bowman rookie cards, from my collection.

So, as promised, here are the Mike Trout RCs I spoke of in my last post.  As I mentioned, I don't typically buy recent cards.  Like, ever; I mostly do T206s, 1933 Goudeys, the 1887-1890 Old Judges, and Topps and Bowman HOFers pre-1960.

I made an exception this year for these three Mike Trout RCs, plus the Bryce Harper RC shown recently, and a Paul Goldschmidt and Jose Altuve RC, because they were very cheap, in mint condition, and of undervalued, under-rated players I believe have a good chance to be stars for a very long time.  Goldschmidt's RC values will go up, especially when he hits free agency and plays for a team collectors care about.  I mean, nobody cares about the Arizona Diamondbacks these days.

Anyway, as I also mentioned, the Mike Trout / Bowman situation was confusing, and took me awhile to come to terms with.  In essence, there are rookie cards that are actually rookie cards, and rookie cards that Ebay sellers say are rookie cards but that aren't, and rookie cards that people believe are rookie cards because they were released during the same season as the player's actual rookie cards, and rookie cards that are not rookie cards because they're prospect cards.  A rookie card is not necessarily the first card released of that player by a major card company.  (Those are now prospect cards and minor league cards.  This is confusing for those of us old enough to remember when the prospect cards from the, say, 1980 and 1981 Topps sets were the actual rookie cards.  Now they aren't.)  A rookie card is the first card made of a player once MLB has decided that he has made enough at-bats, or has pitched in enough games, to qualify as a rookie player.  This can often be a few years after the player has been in the big leagues, and long after his cards have started to appear.

So...the Mike Trout cards shown here (in the first photo, starting at the top and going clockwise) are:

a) ungraded Bowman Draft #101
b) Bowman Chrome Draft #101, graded 9.5 Gem Mint by Beckett (I love that case, by the way, though I don't like the BCCG case, which is also Beckett, just to add to the confusion)
c) Bowman Chrome #175, graded 9 Mint by PSA.

Though the swinging photos of the drafts are the same, and though the number on the back, and the design on the back, are the same, these are different cards.  One's a Chrome, and one's not, and that's just the way it is.  Everything else about them is the same, except the Chrome's picture is maybe not as bright and clear.

The first card, the Bowman Draft, cost me $19.38, including shipping.  I'm frankly taking a chance on it, hoping it'll be graded a 9 or 10.  If it isn't, I've got the other two that are, and this one's a gift for one of two people I know will love to have it, regardless of condition.  They're not as serious about this as I am.  It'll cost me about $7 more to get it graded, shipped and insured, so the total I'd invested in it by then would be $26.38.  At that figure, this card needs to grade an 8.5 to break even.  These values have risen recently in the Beckett Graded guide, and I believe they'll continue to do so.  By the time the next issue comes out, it may only need to grade an 8 for me to break even.

The next one, the Bowman Chrome Draft #101, graded 9.5 Gem Mint by Beckett, has a book value (BV) of $100.  It cost me $50.50, which includes shipping.  This card has also increased in value recently, and I believe it will continue to do so.  You can never assume you can re-sell something for the BV, but I believe this card will come close.  Often you're lucky to get 50% of BV when re-selling, but I believe I can sell this at one of my summer yard sales for $75, which is 75% of the BV.  If I were a baseball card picker, which I suppose I am, I would make a profit from this card of at least $25, especially from baseball fans or card collectors who don't like to use the internet.  Lots of those come to my occasional yard sales.

The last one, the Bowman Chrome #175, graded 9 Mint by PSA, I paid a little more for: $58.51, including shipping. Its BV is $80, which has also gone up recently.  Only a $22 profit on this one, if I ever need to re-sell it, but I believe it'll be worth more by that time.

So why the exception for Mike Trout?  Why buy all three of his Bowman RCs?

Well, first, go to his baseball-reference page here, and take a look at these numbers.

In the only four full years of his career, he's finished 2nd in the MVP voting and has won it once.

He bats leadoff (a move I don't like, and it hasn't helped the Angels) and hits lots of homeruns and drives in a lot of runs, and steals bases and walks (and Ks) a lot, for silly high on-base percentages. As an example of how well he does these things, in his MVP year he led the league in runs scored and in runs batted in.  That's very, very rare, to do that in the same year.  That's a Ruth / Mantle / Williams / Mays thing to do.  Of those, only Mantle and Mays had the same combination of speed and power.  But Mantle ruined his knees and ankles and Mays only showed off his speed on defense after awhile.

Ah, yes--the defense.  He makes acrobatic catches normally.  He doesn't have a great throwing arm, but he can run and go get it as well as anybody.  His first two years he was a web gem about to happen.

Every season he's played, he's led the AL in WAR and in Offensive WAR.  He's been in the top-4 in Slugging % and in OBS.  Top-3 in Runs Scored, Homers, Triples and Walks.  Top-2 in Runs Created, Adjusted Batting Runs and Adjusted Batting Wins.  And Base-Out Runs Added and -Wins Added. And Top-3 in Putouts as an Outfielder, which means he can really go get 'em, and his pitching staff gives up lots of flyballs.

An average CF in the HOF will have 27 Black Ink statistics.  He's already got 20--in just four years. An average HOF CF will have 144 Grey Ink stats.  He's got 77--in just four years.  An average HOF CF will have a 100 HOF Monitor.  He's at 75 already.  The HOFer will score a 50 in HOF standards.  He's at 31 after four years.  He's already the 40th best CF to ever play, and is compared favorably to Mantle, Frank Robinson and Jimmie Foxx.  His 7-year peak is almost that of the average HOFer--in just four years.

And when next baseball season comes around on April 1st, he'll be 23 years old.

And he's the one the ballplayers themselves say is the best right now.  They talk about him like the real old-timers talked about Ruth and Honus Wagner.

Lately

Been away for a few days, so a few things:

--Don't look now, but the Sox are 7-1 in their past 8 games and are finally out of the cellar.

--Baltimore is now there, being one of the faster teams to go from first to last that I've seen.

--The top 3 are the Yanks, Rays and Sox, which you can bet will be the three playing the shell game for the rest of the season.

--A source tells me that you can bet that the Sox will not be paying Papelbon for his services next year.  As they have 3 closers on the roster now, they'll probably try to trade him if they don't think they'll go deep in the playoffs.  If they do, he'll stay, but then go bye-bye via free agency.

--I also hear that all indicators are that Papelbon will have a lights-out year, as he's mentioned he'll test the free agent market next year.  Nice enough guy, I'm told, and not as nutty as you'd think--but not the brightest bulb, either.

--The Angels will have trouble scoring runs consistently this year.  Their pitching and defense will have to be stellar.  This series they haven't been.

--Pitchers need to have better poker faces on the mound.  I'm getting tired of them showing lots of emotion when a call that's not even close doesn't go their way.

--The word is that some players in MLB are taking substances not being tested for yet, sort of a Stealth HGH.  I'm not surprised.

--I also hear that I may be surprised by the support that Manny may get from HOF voters after all.  If he gets in within a few years of eligibility, I will be very surprised.

--You have to wonder why Dice-K can't be like this all the time, if he can be unhittable in two straight starts.  What's going on in there?

--Varitek can go 0 for the season and still catch Game 7 of the World Series for me.

--Then again, so can Heidi Watney, if you know what I'm sayin'.

--The Yanks have 5 out of the top-10 batters in the league in terms of batting average, slugging percentage and on-base percentage.  They'll have to be that way all year in order for them to contend.

--Mike Cameron must have pictures.

--Salty might be too tall to be a catcher.

--Ervin Santana, who could be Pedro, struck out 9 in 7 innings yesterday, but also gave up 9 hits and 5 runs, and some long homeruns.  That, in a nutshell, is why he drives his management crazy.  I remember when he came up, and he was lights out.  Now he's still lights out, but in a different way.

--I just saw Ellsbury thrown out on the second of two consecutive pitchouts.  Before the pitch, Scioscia was going through his signs in the dugout, and I thought: He's calling for another pitchout.  I swear.

--I called a Jim Rice homerun just like that, when I was 14.  A short story due to be in print soon (Space and Time Magazine; look for it in the summer) starts with a reference to the narrator calling a Manny homer, but it's based on me calling Rice's.

--Speaking of which, I was talking to a local former sports reporter yesterday, and when I asked him if he could guess the most perfect homerun swing I ever saw, he said, "Manny's game-winning homer off the Angels in the 2007 ALDS?"  Now, how the hell did he know that?  That was a little bit creepy!

Last Few Days

A few quick things:

--Okie-Dokie isn't ready.  Or, he's as ready as he's going to be, if you know what I mean.

--The McCourt situation with the Dodgers is a disgrace.  They're choosing their bitterness towards each other over the team, the fans, and everyone else.  A travesty.

--Let's hope Youk didn't break a bone tonight.  Looks exactly like Pedroia's injury last year.

--The Sox pitching looks A LOT better.  It's all about the starters, who've strung together five or six straight starts of five innings and one run or less.  They haven't done that since the 50s.  Lots of pitching and hitting firsts this year, most of them not good.

--The Sox tried to give the game away last night, but the A's didn't want it.  They left 15 on base.

--Nobody in the A.L. East is hot out of the gate, or for more than 4 or 5 straight games.  That's why the Sox are only 6-11, but just 4 or so games out.  Had a team started out 12-4 or so, they'd be at least 7 or 8 out, as they should be.

--I'm sick of the texting and driving commercial, though it needs to be said.  My barber got his expensive Jeep crushed in the street-side back corner by a young girl from CT who was texting and driving.

--I miss the AFLAC duck, but I'll say again that if I run AFLAC, I fire Gottfried, too.  Dumb.

--Angels pitching and defense look really good.  Their offense, a little less so.

--Umpiring has been ridiculously awful this week.  Pedroia slid past the bag and was tagged out--very obvious to the naked viewing eye, even with the bag, players and umpire blocking the camera view--but he was called safe anyway.  Even now, nobody knows what the call was on the Cameron/Ellsbury play.  (Though Cameron obviously obstructed the catcher, so he and Ellsbury should have been out.)

--The Sox finally agreed with me that Varitek needs to catch more.  The Sox brass obviously reads this blog.

--The Angels stadium looks great, too, but the excessive water beyond the outfield bothers me there just like it does in Royals Stadium.  What a waste, when a couple of cities in my state have lousy drinking water.  Why am I fixing my faucets when they're just wasting tons of gallons?  I hope they have the larger version of a smaller self-sustaining water system that keeps using the same water.

--Speaking of the Royals, they're doing much better than I, or anyone, thought they would.

--The Sox have 5 everyday players hitting at or below the Mendoza Line (speaking again of the Royals).

--So....Kendys, not Kendrys?  Whatever.  Break a leg, man.  (Sorry.)

--Rumor has it Trump wants to buy the Mets.  Didn't he file for bankruptcy several times?

--Let the circus begin when the potential buyers for the Dodgers line up.

--The relief you hear is Big Papi being happy about his start this year.

--Ellsbury leads the team in homers and yet is hitting below .200.  He shouldn't be hitting flyballs at all.  I want to see all of his hits be on a line somewhere.  I don't want him hitting homers.  Every time he hits it in the air, he owes me 20 pushups.

--Leave a comment below or send an email if you know who said the Mendoza Line reference and the movie and character I alluded to in the last sentence of the last bulleted item.  No looking them up!

5 Baseball Musings

Quick randomness:

--Trevor Hoffman retired too late.  If you're a player having spent your entire career for one organization over a span of 15 years or more, you must reflect upon your decision to play for another team.  Trevor Hoffman finishing his career with the Brewers isn't like Tony Gwynn doing the same, but it's close.  He's free to do what he wants, and certainly the money was outstanding, as the Brewers severely overpaid, but...leaves a slightly bad taste.  Not like Favre leaving the Packers left a bad taste, but, again, it's comparable.

--With the trade of Matt Garza, the Rays have almost completely dismantled its playoff teams of the past few years.  They're going down now as the Rangers continue to ascend.  The lousy attendance at Rays games and the small fanbase were going to catch up with them sooner or later.  Hard to figure, as the Rays have been a winning and exciting team for some years now, certainly for long enough to build a solid fanbase.  But it didn't happen.  You might remember when the Braves weren't selling out home playoff games in the 1990s and 2000s, and when the Marlins couldn't draw during their 2 World Series winning years.  Sinful.

--If the Rays' rookies come through, they'll give the Yanks a fight for 2nd place.  Either way, though, don't look for the Wild Card team to come from the American League East this year.

--What happened to the Angels?  Why doesn't anyone want to play for them anymore?  Nobody's changed in the administration, and I'd play for their manager any day.  They have trucks of money to dump on players, as they always have, and yet nobody's taking it anymore.  They're losing players like they're the Expos, and they can't replace them.  The ones they've lost in the last 3-4 years could form an All-star team.  The players union knows something about the Angels that I and the more-than-casual fan don't know.

--I'll be in the stands for at least 4 Sox games this year.  I have a truly awesome friend who brings me (we travel for the other two games).  I TOLD YOU--I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO IT!!!

Parity

Cliff Lee to the Phillies.  That gives them an embarrassment of riches on pitching and offense.  I was surprised when Philly didn't go deeper in the playoffs last year, and I'll be shocked if they don't make the Series this year.

I'll go on a limb and pick a Sox/Phils World Series.  Sox in six.

Having said that, it seems to me now that the teams to beat in the majors now are the Red Sox, Yanks, Angels, Rangers (replacing the Rays as a potential division-leading team without deep pockets) and Twins (perennial leaders also without the cash of the first three teams) in the American League and, in the National League, the Dodgers, Phillies (which has more money now than ever before), Mets (constant disappointments despite deep pockets), Braves (which doesn't spend as much as the others, without reason), with the Giants contending for now, but with little money to keep up after The Freak leaves.  The Padres are an example of this now.

I say this because I suppose that there is better balance in MLB, yet the same teams--with the sporadic surprises every year--keep making the playoffs, don't they?  Anyone expect the Nationals or Royals to make the postseason?  I'm glad I'm a fan of a team constantly in contention, that's all I'm sayin'.

Take a look at my writers/readers blog, and look at the entry for this blog.  One of those subjects will be on this blog soon.  Topics include HOF voting (Why did Ruth, Williams, etc. have a surprisingly large percentage of voters vote against their inclusion in the Hall?); Pedro's greatness as measured in different ways than maybe you've seen before; a positional analysis of the Sox (and whatever other team I feel like); and a trip around the American League, and a coast through the National.  Lots to get to.  Just tryin' to find the time.