We tend to measure our collections cumulatively, stressing the total number of cards for a particular player or team.
But percentage is an important tool, especially for us set collectors. It tells you where you are on the journey.
I use percentages a lot in my hobby, but one area where I haven't bothered is as far as individual players' cards. I know the totals I have for each of the top players in my collection, thanks to TCDB, but I haven't bothered to look up the percentages. In other words, how far am I in terms of owning every card of a particular player -- or at least every card listed on TCDB?
I got curious when I received a handful of Mike Piazza cards from Mark, formerly of the blog Stats on the Back and currently of IDrawBaseballCards. He is downsizing his Piazza collection to just Mets cards, for whatever inconceivable reason, and offered me anything non-Met in his collection.
These are the items I did not have already (I'm not in the habit of grabbing Piazza A's cards, but it's a lot better than a Piazza Padres card).
These cards brought me to 645 total Piazza cards. That's not a huge number to player collectors -- I'm just 18th in terms of fellow TCDB collectors -- but it's significant for me, as Piazza is the only player not named Kershaw to have more than 600 cards in my collection. I've arrived at that number while rarely seeking out Piazza cards.
But when looking up the percentage of Piazzas I own, I got the answer I knew already: I have very little in terms of the total Piazzas out there. TCDB says there are 14,723 different Piazzas listed on the site, which is one of the higher baseball player totals (still doesn't come close to the 25,000-plus Griffey Jr.'s or the 20,000-plus Trouts).
My Piazza percentage is just 4.4%.
Even for the player I've collected the most, Clayton Kershaw, I'm at just 8.2% of all Kershaws claimed and that's with more than 1,000 in my collection.
It just shows you how much Topps and other companies have catered to player collectors ever since the 1990s began and even a little bit before (I still remember my reaction in 1981 when I was aghast that there were two Steve Garveys in the Donruss set).
So I thought it'd be interesting -- to me -- to see which players have totaled the greatest percentage in my collection for the players that are in my top 100 for the most cards accumulated.
This is what I got:
1. Billy Ashley - 48.0%
2. Ramon Martinez - 42.9%
3. Darren Dreifort - 37.8%
4. Brett Butler - 32.3%
5. Kevin Gross - 31.7%
6. Eric Karros - 30.0%
7. Mike Scioscia - 29.5%
8. Ismael Valdez - 28.7%
9. Pedro Guerrero - 27.5%
10. Todd Worrell - 27.3%
11. Todd Hollandsworth - 24.6%
12. Orel Hershiser - 23.1%
13. Ron Cey - 22.9%
14. Chan Ho Park - 21.5%
15. Raul Mondesi - 21.3%
This list makes me want to find all of the cards remaining for some of these guys, since I'm "so close," particularly for Ramon Martinez. I was surprised that there were just 604 cards for Martinez (I could surpass that total in dupes probably). Finishing off Ashley's cards might be the easiest.
Also, there are two of my all-time favorites in that list in Cey and Hershiser. But trying to finish those would mean collecting Cubs and Giants cards and I have no desire to do that -- yup, I don't really have that player-collector gene.
Here is a list of the players for which I have the smallest percentage for those that are in my top 100 for most cards accumulated:
1. Miguel Cabrera - 0.4%
1. Cal Ripken Jr. - 0.4%
1. Ichiro Suzuki - 0.4%
4. Albert Pujols - 0.5%
5. Greg Maddux - 0.6%
6. Don Mattingly - 0.8%
6. Nolan Ryan - 0.8%
8. Wade Boggs - 0.9%
9. Rickey Henderson - 1.0%
10. Nomar Garciaparra - 1.1%
10. Robin Yount - 1.1%
12. Rod Carew - 1.2%
12. Reggie Jackson - 1.2%
14. George Brett - 1.3%
14. Mike Schmidt - 1.3%
16. Andre Dawson - 1.4%
17. Carlton Fisk - 1.5%
17. Manny Ramirez - 1.5%
19. Mookie Betts - 1.6%
19. Steve Carlton - 1.6%
21. Hanley Ramirez - 1.8%
22. Pete Rose - 1.9%
23. Zack Greinke - 2.3%
24. Gary Carter - 2.4%
25. Paul Konerko - 2.7%
26. Eddie Murray - 2.8%
27. Adrian Beltre - 3.0%
28. Walker Buehler - 3.3%
29. Adrian Gonzalez - 3.5%
30. Cody Bellinger - 3.7%
30. Corey Seager - 3.7%
I expanded it to 30 players (actually 31) because it shows a couple of different reasons why I have such a small percentage of an individual player's cards despite having accumulated a fair amount of them.
One reason is that a lot of the players listed did not play for the Dodgers or played minimally for them (see Rickey Henderson, Greg Maddux). I have no interest in accumulating players from another team so there are a lot of cards out there I don't have.
The other reason is just the stupid amount of cards that are created these days. Corey Seager has more than 7,000 cards on TCDB. I know he was a World Series MVP and all, but having more than 6,000 more cards, six years into your career, than Ramon Martinez, someone who struck out 18 batters in a game and was a rookie sensation just like Seager, and played for over a decade, seems just a tiny bit out of whack to me.
So, anyway, that was an interesting little look at the percentages in my collection.
And, once again, I'm glad I don't solely collect players in my hobby. I need to see that finish line.
Comments
#1: That A's card is cool. When I returned to the hobby, he had just wrapped up his career with the A's and I remember seeing him in an A's uniform on several cards.
#2: That Crash the Game insert sure brings back memories of checking box scores to see if I won.
I actually collect Ashley cause I thought he was going to put up crazy HR totals in the ‘90’s, so I might have some cards of his that you need. I’ll check out your wantlist of him.
On TCDB (uname GoldenEagles555), I can view stats and see my top players by sheer volume of cards in my collection. How are you guys getting, say, top 100 by percentage of a player's cards?
Thank you in advance!
From that point, I had to do the research, calling up each player in my top 100 individually.
Fantastic site - I spend way too much time there - but there are quite a few features that I'd love to see built around collection statistics.