Red Sox 2016

Photo: David Ortiz at the White House, from his Wikipedia page. Just click here.

Yes, I know it's been a long time. Inexcusable, considering the good season. There were lots of entries I could have made here, and I was about to, but then something relevant came up. Also I didn't want to write an entry about how the season ended, considering the abrupt turnaround and the much-improved play. So...

--Let's start it off with a trivia question: When Randy Johnson won his 300th game, for what team was he pitching for? Answer towards the bottom of the column.

--Yes, a disappointing end, but let's remember what they've been the last few years. Bottom line: A much-improved team that now should make the playoffs regularly for a long time to come. And now those who played in a playoffs for the first time (which was almost all of the offensive players, especially those whose offense was . . . well, offensive) will be better prepared for next time. The Big Bs were all shut down this time, but they won't be next time.

--And it looks like Pedroia was playing with a bum knee for much of the season. Didn't know that. But when a player has major surgery a few days after his season ends, that's what that means. Pedroia himself had a resurgent year, and has entered himself into potential HOF talk. Amongst this generation's second basemen, his career is building up to be one of the best.

--Baseball-reference and JAWS say Pedroia's the 19th-best ever, and his fielding % is 4th-best, ever. (Click on the link for his page and stats.) Is there another second basemen you'd rather have? I'll take a leadoff batter with a .350+ OBP, 200 hits and great defense. Can't count the number of times this year I saw him make a great play going up on the ball, rather than just down. Amazing defense.

--And it looks like Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley and Benetendi will be good players for a long time. I have a 10 baseball and a 10 autograph of Betts and Bradley, by the way. Look at the blog about Betts's ball by clicking here.

--Don't be surprised if Ortiz has a tough time, at first, getting into the Hall. He's a DH, and he's got a cloud of PEDS suspicion, especially with HGH. True, his name (and the others) were not supposed to be leaked from the Biogenesis report--but it still was there. And I don't know that the country's sportswriters revere him like those in New England do. But I do think he'll eventually get in.

--If he does, Edgar Martinez should, too. But Ortiz was better. And he wasn't exactly the defensive liability that Edgar Martinez was. Ortiz could play first base if you were truly desperate, but I wouldn't have put Edgar Martinez on the field under any circumstance, especially at third base.

--His F-bomb after the Boston bombing will win over some of the out-of-New England writers, and his extreme popularity with other players and with the media cannot be ignored. That kind of stuff shouldn't matter with the writers' HOF vote, but it always does.

--It's a good thing, though, that the umpires don't do the voting. Ortiz, in all honesty, would make the HOF of Home Plate Whining at Umpires. And, for a few years there, the HOF of Contract Whining.

--Bradley may be one of the streakiest hitters of all-time. Not too many batters have led their league in longest hitting streak, as Bradley led the American League this year with his 29-gamer, and yet still finish at .267 or so for the year. In the playoffs this was especially frustrating.

--Any STATS employee or sabermetrics virtuoso, please feel free to look that up and leave a comment. Who has the lowest batting average of anyone who led his league that year with the longest hitting streak? My guess: Jackie Bradley, Jr. 2016.

--Worthless stat that just popped in my head: What player had the lowest batting average and yet led his league in homers? Answer: Tony Armas, Boston, .218. In the mid-80s, maybe before your time.

--I've met him--Jackie Bradley, that is, not Tony Armas--and spoken with him twice. Good guy, very soft-spoken. I'm glad he's finally made it. (Made the two autographs I have of him worth more, too.)

--The Sox may have the MVP and Cy Young on the same team for the first time since 1986. (Roger Clemens won both that year.)

--While we're at it, the trivia answer from the top: Randy Johnson won his 300th while pitching for the San Francisco Giants. (!) Yeah, I wouldn't have guessed that, either. I just happened to be on his baseball-reference page before I started this column. I wanted to see who was greater, Clemens or Johnson. Answer, Clemens, and it's not close, both in peak value and in career value. Both are top-10.

--And don't even bother telling me that one took PEDS and one didn't, because I don't believe that either one of them could've pitched that long, at that level, and that hard, without some help. I know Nolan Ryan just had Alleve, but still...he may have benefited from the same stuff that apparently helped Mantle and Ruth, if you catch my drift.

--Every time Bogaerts swings at a pitch low and (way) outside, he needs to drop and give me 20. Right there at the plate, like Willie Mays Hayes.

--The entire Boston team in 2016 may have been one of the streakiest ever. Without that 11-game winning streak, they may not have made the playoffs at all.

--And at least Ortiz got to go out at Fenway.

--Goodbye, Big Papi. It won't be the same without you.

--And good luck to Tito Francona and Mike Napoli. And Lester and Lackey, too, if they make it.

Picking A 1933 Goudey HOF Jim Bottomley

Here's a before and after story about being a baseball card picker--the purchase, grading and valuation of a good baseball card.

I bought an ungraded 1933 HOF Jim Bottomley on Ebay in a screwdown case. Here's a picture of it from the listing after I bought it:

I spent $36.51 and paid $3.50 shipping, for a total of $40.01. (Notice the penny extra on the bid.)

I took a chance here--not something I typically do with money in general. But the Goudeys are one of the Big Three sets. The 1909-1911 T206s (which I've written about many times), the 1952 Topps and the 1933 Goudeys are the most-collected and sought-after sets. Any card from these sets will sell for more than average; HOF cards from these sets will be worth a premium value. And highly-graded HOF cards from these sets will be worth good money. A card in decent condition (even, in most cases, in poor condition) from these sets will re-sell, no problem. So if you want to collect a card and try to make a good profit at the same time, these are the cards to get. (I would throw the 1888 Old Judges and the T205s in this category as well. And any card, really, between 1900 to 1933.)  The trick is to buy one at a low price--ungraded cards can be bought for even cheaper--and then to send them away to SGC, PSA or Beckett to get them graded.

But doing so is taking a chance. No matter what you guess a card will be graded, it sometimes seems these guys grade the cards almost at whim, defying any reasonable explanation. (I have proof of this.) But if you want to increase a card's value, you have to get it graded. Out of all the companies, I think Beckett is the best for cards after 2000. PSA is best for cards 1960-1999. And SGC is best for all cards prior to 1960. It seems that overall card values back me up with this.

So what to buy? I've bought ungraded T206s and written about those before. But I'd never done so for a Goudey and I wanted to try. So if you're going to do that, you need to buy a popular player or a HOFer. But many of those are out of my price range. (Ruths and Gehrigs are worth hundreds or thousands of dollars.) I decided upon a HOFer nobody but serious fans know (and who shouldn't be in the HOF but for Veterans Committee shenanigans) and to get it raw, which means ungraded. The ones available during the limited time I allowed myself (because I could so easily go overboard with this and there goes the mortgage) were scant, and I settled on this guy.

Anyway, I sent it to SGC during its December Goudey/Play Ball/Diamond Star Special of $8 per card. (I also sent a HOF Rabbit Maranville Goudey, which I knew was in terrible condition; I was lucky to get that graded in Poor condition.) Because this venture is all about value and profit, you wait until the grading company has a sale on its grading. By chance, this sale came up right when I bought the card. Normally SGC charges $10 per card from this era.

So a few days ago (the website publishes your results when they're done, even before you get it in the mail) it was graded a 5 Excellent--which is really good for a 1933 Goudey, as they were handled a lot, and they're old, and they fray and literally disintegrate, and the corners round easily. The card, now graded, looks like this:

My Beckett Graded book shows the highest graded 1933 Goudey Jim Bottomley to be an 8, and I've got a 5. Not bad for $40! Book value? $150!!! Because you often can't get book value on cards, I looked up recently sold SGC 5 graded 1933 Jim Bottomley Goudeys on ebay. (I checked off the "sold listings" box; just because someone's asking $300 for the card on ebay, that doesn't mean it's worth $300. People ask insane prices via "Buy It Now" on ebay. But if a card has sold recently at a consistent price, that card is worth that price.) A PSA 5 (same exact grade and conditions, and PSA and SGC are equally respected) sold on January 10th, 2016 for $159.99, which shows the book value of $150 to not only be accurate, but maybe even a little low.

So I spent $40 on it, and paid $8 to get it graded, plus a couple bucks for shipping and insurance, for a total of $10 more. In summary, I paid $50 and it's worth at least $150---three times what I paid. Not bad! Even if I sent it to a 3rd party (an ebay company I do business with) and got the 87% he gives, and spent maybe $5 to send it to him, my profit is around $75-$80. Not bad for one card! It all took just minutes of my time, mostly sitting on my butt at my computer, and my post office doesn't usually have any lines, either. I could seriously make some part-time income doing this.

My T206 Gifts to Myself

Photos: Jimmy Williams and Charlie Rhodes T206s.  These are not the exact same two cards mentioned in the story below.  The two pictured here are in Near Mint condition and worth about $550 each.  And I ain't payin' that.  These pics are from a great T206 card site, PSAcard.com.


So, if you've read the last few entries, you may be wondering: "Did he get any T206s for himself?"

Well, I did, and I'm ecstatic about them.  I got two, and both for the price of what the Grimes or Stark would've cost.

First, I got a Jimmy Williams SGC 3/40 VG T206 card.  This means that SGC, a top-notch card grading company (I only buy graded cards now, which is necessary but sort of sad.  That's another entry for another day.), graded the card at the third-lowest level, which is Very Good.  That's an actual grade, and not just someone at the company saying, "Wow, that's in very good condition."

Anyway, as I explained before, Very Good condition is more than good enough for me, as anything higher than that can get silly expensive.  Very Good cards will look great, and are far better than Poor, Poor/Fair, Fair and Good condition cards.  I'm actually happy with cards in Good condition, though that's the lowest condition I'll buy in, unless we're talking HOF T206 ballplayers.  Those guys are often expensive even in Poor condition, because they're HOFers and everyone wants them, so they're at a premium, even in bad condition.  I have T206s of about 7 HOFers, and they're in either Poor, Fair or Good condition.  Anything higher than that will be over $100 apiece, minimum.  Often, they'd be in the hundreds or thousands of dollars.

So, the book value--I use Beckett's Graded Card Price Guide--of this exact Jimmy Williams card, in this exact condition, was $60.  That's a little high for me at Christmastime (and during most other times), but I figured I'd watch the bidding and give it a shot.  I've made a few extra bucks recently--not much, but enough to buy myself one or two affordable (ie--inexpensive) cards for Christmas and New Year's.  Or Thanksgiving and Christmas, if I want to be naughty and get myself another one for New Year's, which I probably will.  And then another a month later for my birthday...

But I digress.  So the shipping for this card was $3.50, and the BV was $60, as I mentioned.  I'd watched the Babe Ruths and Ty Cobbs and the Magie error card and the Grimes card and the Dolly Stark card come and go by now, and I wanted something, so I tried for this one.  (Jimmy Williams was a nobody player--a common card, in the hobby--and by far the least valuable of all the names I just mentioned.)  The highest visible bid was up to just $22 or so.  (If you've bid on Ebay before, you know the highest visible bid is often far below the actual highest bid.) 

I'm old hat at this kind of thing, so I knew that a common T206 in Very Good condition will often hit the $40 or $50 mark.  If it did, I wouldn't bid.  The BV was $60, and the shipping was $3.50, but you don't want to spend the book value price, and you certainly don't want to spend over the BV price.  (If you read the previous two entries, you know what I mean.)  Like the Dolly Stark card, which was more valuable, I didn't want to spend over $45 total.  I mean, I've bought HOF T206s in Poor or Good condition in the $40s and $50s, so I wasn't going to do that for a common card, even in VG condition.

As I've mentioned, you have to have a set dollar figure in mind--including shipping, which is not part of the card's value but yet is still money you have to pay--and never exceed that.  Otherwise, this Ebay thing can get out of hand in a hurry and suddenly you're in debt.

So I put in my max dollar amount, and I wait until the proper number of seconds remain before I post my bid.  (I ain't tellin' you my bid or the number of seconds I wait for.  Cuz I'm silly and unrealistic like that.)  And in the last ten seconds, the bids go from $22 to $23, $24, $24.55 and to $30 before my bid wins.

I've just watched the Dolly Stark sell for $63--admittedly, a fair price, since the BV was $80, but it was still more than I wanted to spend.  Another card, Josh Devore, had sold for $82, and the BV was $150, but still the $82 was more than I wanted to spend, though that one stung a little when it got that high.  (It had been in the $30s for awhile and I was hoping.)  The Magie error card went for over fourteen grand, and I saw Cobbs and Ruths sell for thousands, and I'm still waiting.  (This all took about half an hour, by the way, in case you thought I'd wasted my night doing this.)

I didn't spend the $63 or the $82 because I was able to get a T206 in Very Good condition (same condition as the other two) for just $31, plus $3.50 shipping.  And then, just a few minutes later, I was fortunate enough to get a Charlie Rhodes T206, also in Very Good condition, for just $28, plus $3.50.

Unfortunately, these two cards weren't from the same place, so I couldn't save on shipping, which I always try and do.  But, anyway, the bottom line is that I was able to get two VG condition T206s for a total of $66, including shipping.  Which is why I didn't spend $66.50--including shipping--for the one Dolly Stark card (though that would've been nice, and remains a personal thing with me), or the $85.50 for the one Josh Devore card--both in the same condition as the two I did get.  I'd rather spend $66 total for two VG T206s than over $20 more than that for one VG T206.

That's my Christmas present to myself.  I'm going to pay for those right now and log off from Ebay and not log back in for at least another month.  That's what I do--jump in, buy one or two, and then shut it down for at least a couple of months.  So as not to go crazy and in debt.  I can see why people would get addicted to this and drive themselves bankrupt.

And so that's it.  Happy Holidays and Happy New Year to my readers.  Be good to yourself this holiday season and this New Year's.  Get something inexpensive for yourself, too.  You deserve it!

Derek Jeter

I know I'm a little behind on my HOF posts, and on my posts in general for this site.  Having said that, a few words about Derek Jeter, after his last game today at Fenway Park:

--Obvious HOF because of his lifetime stats, most obvious his 3,464 hits, 6th most all-time.

--Also top-10 all-time in ABs, PAs, Runs Scored and Singles.  Considering he batted 1st or 2nd the vast majority of the time, these are excellent things for him to be amongst the greatest of all-time.  Probably the greatest second-in-the-order hitter ever.

--Some surprises (all this is courtesy of baseball-reference.com):

-12th all-time in Times-on-Base.  If you consider the all-time greats of Ted Williams (okay, shorter career), Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, etc., all those you'd think of as all-time super-stars, the fact that Jeter got on base via a hit, walk or HBP 12th amongst all these guys is very impressive.

-His Offensive Winning % is 45th-best, ever.  That includes everybody--pitchers and position players.  That's Clemens, Grove, Cy Young, Pete Rose, people better defensively than he was...everyone.  This is very high.

-His 1,909 Runs Created is 27th-best, all-time.  This is runs scored, runs batted in and everything in between.

-13th-most strikeouts ever.  I know he batted a ton of times, but this is still surprising to me.

-21st-most total bases, ever.  Again, considering all the big boys--Williams, Ruth, Gehrig, Aaron, Mays, Mantle, etc.--being 21st is very high.  Especially when you consider that those guys hit homers and Jeter hit singles and doubles.  That's a lot of singles and doubles to party with those guys in TBs.

-Player of the Week just 3 times--and Player of the Month just once!

-Never won MVP, though he did finish 2nd and 3rd a few times.  But, Pedroia excepted, American League MVPs usually go to the home run guys.

-5 Gold Gloves.  Granted, GGs are given just as much for offensive performance as it is for defensive excellence (though of course it shouldn't be that way), but, still, 5 Gold Gloves is a lot for a guy who's often ridiculed for his defense.

-Having said that, baseball-reference says he owes the Yanks 9.7 games over his career for his defense.

-But he's won them 95.3 games over his career due to his offense.  Divided by 17 or 18 full years, that's about 5 1/2 games a year, just him.  That's a lot.

-He's had 650 post-season ABs.  That's another full season.

-He had a .308 batting average and a .374 OBP during that "extra season."  Keep in mind, this is the playoffs, so this would be against the better pitching staffs in all of baseball.  The .374 OBP is more impressive than the .308 BA considering this.

-The same website has compared him to the HOF shortstops already enshrined, and had this to say:

JAWS	Shortstop (12th), 71.7 career WAR/42.2 7yr-peak WAR/57.0 JAWS Average HOF SS (out of 21) = 66.7 career WAR/42.8 7yr-peak WAR/54.7 JAWS

In other words, he's a little to quite-a-bit better than the average HOF shortstop.  In short, he's a HOFer.

The two things I'll remember most about Jeter:

1) The infamous 2004 game, weeks before Nomar got traded, in a game that Nomar refused to play, Jeter jumped into the stands to catch a foul ball--and got a bloody chin and cheek for it.  At Fenway.  Later in the game, Nomar refused to pinch-hit--for Cesar Crespo, if I'm not mistaken.  I know Salad will correct me if I am wrong about this.  :-)

The story goes that this so angered Red Sox brass that it was the last straw, and they were intent on trading Nomar after this.  In other words, if Jeter hadn't played all-out that game (as he admittedly did for all his games), then the Sox front office wouldn't have shopped Nomar--and the Sox don't win the 2004 World Series.

2.  In a 2001 playoff game against the A's, a throw gets away from the cut-off man and Jeremy Giambi (surely one of MLB's all-time bad baserunners) tries to score.  Jeter, who was roaming the infield, runs about 100 feet out of his shortstop position, grabs the ball that's trickling on the 1st-base line about 15 feet from home, and throws a shovel-pass to the catcher, Jorge Posada, who tags Giambi out.  (Giambi looks back in shock, though the real surprise is his refusal to slide, as he's tagged on his foot.)

This is ballgame with-it-ness that can't be taught.  Not too many guys have his head in the game so much to make that play.  (I played awhile, and I can honestly say that I would've watched with my mouth agape as the ball rolled away and the run scored.)  The Yanks win this playoff game 1-0, too.  Neither of these two plays show up in Jeter's defensive stats, and he was not a particularly gifted defensive shortstop like Alex Gonzalez or many others.  But Jeter has to be one of the headiest ballplayers of all-time, a player for whom the stats will not do total justice.  This says a lot, since he has Hall-of-Fame stats.

More than anything else, worthy of the Hall for his Hall-of-Fame consistency.  Offensively and defensively.  And for just the intangibles, which is usually a BS word, but not in his case.

And, finally, it's oversaid, but it's not wrong: Jeter's a guy who respected the game and the people in it.  He wouldn't have slapped the ball out of Bronson Arroyo's hand, for example.  Or put pine tar on his wrist, and then on his neck, as did the pitcher who started and won Jeter's last game.  He played the game right, and he has the $600+ million dollars and--soon--the HOF plaque to prove it.

A great player--even if he never made an appearance in my last Fenway game of this season, this past Friday, the day after his You-can't-make-it-up last game at Yankee Stadium.  Still, a great player.

World Series Tied, 2-2.

Quite a bit, so let's get to it:

--I've never seen a World Series game--or any game--end on an obstruction play.

--But when you commit lots of errors over two games in the World Series, you're likely to lose them.

--I've never seen a World Series game end on a pick-off.  But, as a holder of useless information, I can tell you that Babe Ruth, of all people, was thrown out trying to steal second to end a World Series.  Not just the game--the entire series.

--Ortiz singles, and Tim McCarver says that Napoli should come in at first for the bottom of the eighth.  With that, McCarver finally said something in this World Series that I agreed with.

--No matter what happens tomorrow, it's going back to Fenway.  What else could you ask for?

--The Sox are hitting a combined .189 in this World Series.  The Cardinals are hitting .234.  Also not good, but they're Murderer's Row by comparison.

--Considering this, the Sox are lucky to be 2-2.

--With two more errors tonight, they've now committed six in the past three games.  Again, lucky to be 2-2.  This is after they won Game 1 because of the Cardinals' errors.

--I don't want to see Middlebrooks in the field for the rest of the Series.

--I already didn't want to see him at the plate.  Neither, for that matter, did his manager, John Farrell.

--That goes for all of next year, too.  I'm happy with Drew at short for his defense, and Bogaerts at third.  Middlebrooks can go.  Get whatever you can for him, even if it's just a middle-of-the-road reliever.

--With the game ending on a pick-off, does the batter--Carlos Beltran--get credit for an at-bat, or a plate appearance?  I think the at-bat has to end before you get credit for it.  Feel free to weigh in if you know the (irrelevant) answer.

--Sox World Series ERA after this game: 2.27.  St. Louis's ERA: 3.60.

--That tells you how many Sox errors there've been.  Many, if not most, of the runs are unearned for St. Louis.  They still count, of course.

--Craig Breslow needs to sit for awhile.

--Seven total errors for the Sox in four World Series games.

--That was Gomes's first, and only, hit of this World Series.

--Kudos to John Lackey for coming in for a scoreless eighth for his first relief appearance at all since 2004.

--And kudos to Big Papi for firing up the troops in the dugout.

--Speaking of Ortiz, he doesn't make the pick-off tag that Napoli did to end the game.

--Doubront is suddenly effective in the past few games.  He can be Breslow for now.

--Why was Tazawa allowed to just face one batter, especially since he got him in the most tense part of the game?  I'm guessing his tank is empty.

--Just found out why I've never seen a World Series game end in the way the past two games have: Because neither has ever ended a World Series game before.  If it's never happened, I won't see it.

--Stephen Drew can hit zip for the rest of this World Series, and all of next year, and I'll still play him at short for his defense alone.

--At one point in this game, David Ortiz had 7 of the 21 total hits the Sox had in this World Series at that moment.  That's one player having 33% of his team's hits, for you math lovers out there.

--Buchholz was maxed out after just four innings.  He topped out in the mid- to high-80s.  Worried?

--I hope Uehara doesn't have to pitch tomorrow so he can have two days' rest.

--Has it occurred to anyone that, incredibly, the Cardinals have been better without Albert Pujols?  With the money they saved by not re-signing him, they signed two good starters and two relievers.

--For that matter, who would've known that the Angels would be much worse after they sign Pujols and Josh Hamilton?  And with Mike Trout leading off for them to drive in, if he doesn't drive himself in?

--Take a look at my regular blog soon to read about an actual nightmare I had with Will Middlebrooks in it.  Bizarre, is all I can say.

1923 Willard's Chocolates--George H. Burns--20 Fair 1.5

Today I'm starting a new feature that spotlights one of my cards per week.  I'll try to keep the cards and the players as varied as I can.  I'll write about the player first, then the card.  Sometimes the card will be available for sale.  I'll say so at the bottom of the entry.  So look back here for a new entry, on average once per week, about a card and player.  And look back to previous entries about some cards I've already written about.

This one is a 1923 Willard's Chocolates: George H. Burns--in 20 Fair 1.5 condition, which isn't too bad for the age.  I mean, this card is 90 years old, after all.  I hope I look as good at 90, if I even reach that age.

The backs are blank, like the 1887 N182 Old Judges and the 1921 Exhibits.  (Love those, too, but they're very expensive.  The 1887s cost at least $100 each, in authentic, presentable or fair condition, which are the three lowest.  Crazy money, for me, anyway.)  This one has writing on the back, which I'm not crazy about.  Normally I don't buy blankbacks that aren't blank, especially if there's writing on it.  But this card was at a price I couldn't refuse.  It's the only 1921 Willard's Chocolates I own.

The Player

I was interested in the card partly because I was vaguely familiar with the player.  I knew that a George Burns led the league in hits in the 20s for a year, and won an MVP, and was a solid player.  The Hall of Famers' cards cost more, of course, so I had to stay away from those.  But you tire of buying commons of good cards, too--though this card is more a commons than a star card.  Still...So if you look him up on baseball-reference.com, which is the site I always use to get stats, you'd find that there were actually two George Burns playing in the 20s.  There's my guy, at this address, and then there's another guy, who played in the mid-10s to the mid-20s, at this address.  They were both good players, but time being what it is, let's focus on my guy.

He had an odd career, if you look at the stats.  In 1918 he led the league in games, hits and total bases, while batting .352 and with an almost-.400 on-base percentage.  Despite this, he only scored 61 runs, which tells me that he either didn't bat leadoff (or even in the top-5 in the order) or that the Philadelphia Athletics of 1918 was a bad team.  Or both.  Anyway, in spite of his good play, he was a part-time player in 1920 and in 1921--two prime years, when he was 26 and 27, peak years for many ballplayers.  He apparently got stuck in the depth chart behind another first baseman, and he was flat-out bought by the Cleveland Indians (for whom he was playing in 1923, the year of my card).  He was a part-time player for them, before being traded to the Boston Red Sox for Stuffy McInnis, an extremely good player.  He played very well for Boston, which traded him back to Cleveland in a huge trade you can read about at the bottom, beneath all the stats.

He played great in Cleveland, batting .306, .328, .310, .336, .358 and .319.  While averages across the league were up between 1921 and 1939, this is still very good.  In 1926 he was the MVP, with 216 hits and 64 doubles, a record until Earl Webb hit 67 for the Red Sox a few years later.  (Webb's record still stands today, so Burns' 64 is still in the top-5 or so.)  He had 3 triples, 4 homers and 115 RBIs, which means those doubles drove in a ton of runs, plus whatever singles he hit.  (This also means Cleveland was a good team, with lots of runners on base, and that Burns hit between 2nd and 5th in the lineup.)

But something happened, because two years later he was flat-out bought by the New York Yankees, who barely used him for a couple of seasons, before selling him back to the Philadelphia Athletics, who rarely played him.  And that's it.  He played twice for two different teams, and he seemed to be wanted, yet easily sold or traded, at the same time.

A very strange career for a very good player.  He led the league in hits twice, eight years apart, which is hard to do in general, but especially if you're playing in the same league as Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Rogers Hornsby and all those guys.  He finished second in hits and average one year; finished second to Babe Ruth in RBIs during his MVP year, and constantly was among the league-leaders in hits, average and defensive statistics, including consecutive games played and fielding percentage.  He snagged an MVP from them as well, when he was 33.  He had over 2,000 hits and hit over .300 for his career.  A quick glance at his defensive stats shows that he was good, maybe a little better than average.  Not a Gold Glove winner, but solid enough not to make a jerk of himself there, and he once made an unassisted triple play, which is very rare. Burns also played in two World Series, and won both of them, nine years apart.

I went to his Wikipedia page to see why he was traded or sold so often, and why he was made a part-time player in the middle of his career after very good seasons, and at the end, just a year after winning the MVP.  It didn't tell me a thing, except that there might not be anything to say, and that he became a good minor-league player and manager, and then a sheriff of a small town.  I guess injuries could explain the part-time status and the trades, but I would've thought Wikipedia would show that.  Maybe he had Rogers Hornsby disease: despite a HOF career and being a world-class hitter as the National League's Babe Ruth (and a second basemen!), Hornsby was also an uncontested jerk who teams couldn't wait to get rid of, and which actually became better after getting rid of him, despite replacing him with a worse player.  (A-rod is a present-day example.)  But, again, I would guess that the Wikipedia page would've mentioned that he was hard to get along with.  Instead, this article's writer seemed to be obsessed with Burns' greatness as a right-handed hitter, and with right-handers in general.

I suspect that there's more here to know.  If you feel like it, please investigate and leave a comment.

The Card

As stated by PSAcardfacts.com (click this link and look at the beautiful Babe Ruth card):

"The 1923 Willards Chocolate set consists of 180 cards, each measuring about 2” x 3-1/4”. Produced by a Canadian firm, the Willards Chocolate Company, the unnumbered cards feature a sepia-tone player photo with a white border. A facsimile autograph is printed across the image. The back of every card is blank. The key cards belong to Ty Cobb, Walter Johnson and of course, Babe Ruth. This set is also anchored by Grover Cleveland Alexander, Stan Coveleski, Hugh Duffy, Johnny Evers, Frank Frisch, Kid Gleason, Burleigh Grimes, Harry Hooper, Rogers Hornsby, Miller Huggins, Connie Mack, Branch Rickey, and Tris Speaker. The company inserted one card into packages of their products. The set’s unique imagery has kept the Willards Chocolate issue extremely popular with collectors, and partly as the result of coming from a Canadian manufacturer is seen as being relatively rare."

Apparently they're commonly found trimmed, with the white border cut away, leaving just the picture.  (Some of the T206s I've seen were trimmed, too, like we do today with a copy that has too much black ink.  I don't get the point of doing this to baseball cards, but whatever.  Who knew in 1922 that they'd be worth so much?)  Anyway, they're worth less, obviously, if they're trimmed.  Mine isn't.  A graded set of 6.+ sold in 2010 for $71,700.  The Babe Ruth was $35,000 in Mint condition, and $315 in poor condition, which is a worse state than mine's in.  The Ty Cobb was $18,000 in Mint condition, and $155 in poor condition.  I don't own those, of course.  I make it a point not to buy cards for more than $15 to $25, and for even less, when I can.  I did so for this card, and it's not for sale.