Originally Posted by MUsoxfan
That's fine and I understand that aspect of it. What I was mostly responding to was the claim that players know what makes an autograph valuable. That, to me, suggests value on the open market. I don't see why a guy like Jim Thome would want to go out of his way to make it easy for a guy to make maximum cash on the back end.
If Thome signs something for someone to keep around the house, what does it matter how he signs it. Isn't just good enough to know that you met the guy and he signed something for you to display? Seems petty to complain about how he signed a baseball not on the sweet spot or that he didn't put other little details in the signature when there are hundreds of other people waiting and a limited timeframe in which to do it.
I'm probably not going to change your mind on any of this, but I appreciate the discussion.
So, if you truly just collect this stuff to display in your den or tv room, you want it to look nice. The sweet spot on the ball is the longest part of the ball to put a full signature such that it is not squeezed. It displays nicely like that. If a guy puts his number next to his name, it looks more complete and helps you remember who's signature it is.
Let me show you a classic example of a "good" auto and a "bad" auto. AJ Pierzynski has always been cordial when I've seen him. He's signed some nice World Series stuff for me. However, I've seen him tank his autograph for some people.
Here's AJ's nice signature (you can basically read it...)
Here's AJ's crappy signature (just a scribble...)
That second one looks like something a pre-school kid would do with his crayons. AJ may have been in a bad mood when he did that
But, yeah, tell me which one you would want to display at home and if you'd feel good about the experience if you got the 2nd version of the autograph after standing in line for an hour.