We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

Mickey Mantle Autographed Baseball

First and foremost, I will eventually be sending the ball out to JSA to verify its authenticity.

The reason I'm asking for opinions should be quite clear to anyone familiar with vintage baseball. It is Mickey Mantle autograph on a Gene A. Budig AL Baseball. Budig, the last MLB President, reigned from 1994-99, but the balls didn't pop up until 1995.

Looks good? Yes it does. However, many forgeries look good. I am convinced that this is one of the last balls The Mick signed before passing away. This would mean he signed this ball the very same year of his passing (1995), and could possibly fetch a few more dollars on the market.

Ahh, now comes the story of the ball. My grandfather has an extensive collection of rare coins and (all sorts of) memorabilia. He was a rocket scientist (literally) and a genius, so I don't believe he would've been conned / duped. Then again, every man has his flaws, and his was being extremely wealthy. In most cases, this isn't a flaw, but when it comes to purchasing collectibles it could be. Just dishing out money because you can afford to, without doing proper research, because when you "got it" you tend not to fear repricussions and/or consequences.

Please, my fellow citizens of the Interwebs, your input would be appreciated. Should I go forward with the COA/LOA? Or bring it to the park to use in a good ol' game of fetch with the dogs….

Tags: AL, Mantle, Mickey, Yankees, authenticity, autograph, baseball

0 members like this

Attachments: No photo uploads here

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Kaminski on April 12, 2014 at 10:03am

Has some odd features, but I'm gonna say its good.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve on April 12, 2014 at 10:58am

It may be good, even with the odd features, but I would stay away from it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dane on April 12, 2014 at 7:01pm

I would send it to Richard Simon Sports, rather than JSA. I didn't look at the photos, since you already own the ball, and the consensus is that it's off, but probably good. My giving the same opinion would add no value to the discussion.

http://richardsimonsports.com/auth.html

That's the link to contact Richard about his fees for authenticating the signature.

Edit: I just looked at it... the Nantle looks not good at all.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on April 12, 2014 at 8:09pm

I don't like it

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on April 13, 2014 at 9:36am

A very interesting example. Either a slightly loose and slightly odd real example or a very good fake.

It appears to have been signed quickly and naturally and doesn't have any appearance of being drawn like the vast majority of mantle fakes. I think there is a good possibility it may be authentic, but as others have stated, it will raise eyebrows one way or the other. Typically, I try to avoid examples in my collection that are atypical... Even if undoubtedly real.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on April 13, 2014 at 10:40am

definitely a challenging one. but the pen pressure is atypical, and how many authentic Mantle's have you seen where the "L" is taller than the "T" in Mantle? too many question marks in my opinion.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Kaminski on April 13, 2014 at 10:44am

I have a feeling it's real, but yeah like I said, there's a lot of odd things about it. Definitely not a definitive yes/no

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on April 13, 2014 at 5:01pm

It is not a great example but could be authentic. Mantle autographs on a Budig ball, although certainly possible, are pretty tough to find.

I personally don't like it but if not authentic it is a good forgery.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by loren gar on April 13, 2014 at 11:34pm

It looks like one that was deemed as fake by someone on this site=http://live.autographmagazine.com/forum/topics/ebay-seller-davidl68...aseball

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Null on April 14, 2014 at 8:57am

Not authentic IMO.

IMO it's the same forger as this one, who happened to have a halfway decent attempt for once:

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on April 14, 2014 at 9:15am

I don't agree it is from the same hand as this obvious fake. :-)

The ball you have shown is much more heavy handed, "tight" and appears drawn. The shape of the Ms is also significantly different. The other ball was signed with a much lighter and loose hand.

Just my 2 cents...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Null on April 14, 2014 at 11:32am

Here is a photo by the same forger, underneath is the ball in question from the OP. The "M"s are slightly better on the ball in question, but some of the other tendencies match up very closely IMHO: