Another why don't we have his best card moment

Ron Perranoski from the Super Sixties.
https://365.strat-o-matic.com/player/39434/1660/1/60

Pete Richert from The 70's Game.
https://365.strat-o-matic.com/player/740107/1670/1/70

OK, I take it back re Richert. That card would be no help at all. Now I'm amazed that he put up these numbers in a 1972 only season league for me (Chevy version season) In short, the card was much better before ballpark effects were applied
Player name ERA W L pct gms IP H R ER hr BB K
P.Richert 1.68 4 1 .800 42 0 0 0 0 53.2 34 12 10 3 11 38

How about 1972 Pete Richert?

I'd argue that 1969 might be Richert's best season (and not carded).

Dick Hall from the Super Sixties set. Just click the 1964 season.

https://365.strat-o-matic.com/player/34847/1660/1/60

Nice card for sure. Thanks for sharing.

How about Ron Perranoski 1963? He saved 21 games, and was 16-3 with a 1.67 ERA. ATG9 has the 1962 and 1965 Perranoski seasons.

He also finished 4th in the MVP voting that season. So yeah, I think that would be a great card.

If you ask me, we don't need 4 cards of the decent to good players (such as Hall, Richert & Perranoski), we should simply have the BEST card for those guys.

I agree. In fact, forget Richert. Even his best card has a # problem

Not disputing the theme here, but what the game really needs is a bigger variety of .50 - 1.00 hitters. David Howard and Jose Tartabull are getting real old.

Not disputing the theme here, but what the game really needs is a bigger variety of .50 - 1.00 hitters. David Howard and Jose Tartabull are getting real old.

I couldn't agree more! Ever since ATG9, the pool of usable bench players is rather poor.

Not disputing the theme here, but what the game really needs is a bigger variety of .50 - 1.00 hitters. David Howard and Jose Tartabull are getting real old.

I couldn't agree more! Ever since ATG9, the pool of usable bench players is rather poor.

When Frank Taveras' price more than doubles you've got a problem.