Jump to content

What is this mask?


wolfe_man
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 742 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Recommended Posts

I think Nike steel too, but I see Stk004's point as well which is why I asked. The lightweight and angled ear guards suggest the Nike steel, but the wide bottom U-bar looked like Wilson catcher's models a little.

But then I have a Wilson WTA3007 and A3008 and the ear guards are different on them than this.  I'm pretty confident it is a Nike. 

It looks like it's been coated, perhaps by Tony as it has a very sparkly metallic silver. It really catches the light when it moves. It has a couple nics and needs a need job done on it now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

@wolfe_man I can confirm that the one with TW is a Wilson. The two masks from JoHart are noticeably different on the angle of the U bar, no? 

The one in the OP looks like a Wilson due to the angle in the U bar but I’m not sure that those ear guards are Wilson. Seem to be more angled and bigger than the ones on the Wilson catcher masks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2018 at 2:28 PM, Stk004 said:

@wolfe_man I can confirm that the one with TW is a Wilson. The two masks from JoHart are noticeably different on the angle of the U bar, no? 

I don't think so, it's the angle of the pic.  JoHart's mask (shown above with both red and blue pads) is the same mask just with different pads as he was offering your choice.  If you look at the bottom strap on the U bar, it's all the same... at least IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is definitely NOT a Wilson WTA3007 which can be confused with a Nike at first glance, much like a +POS.  Closer inspection can discount both Wilson and +POS rather quickly due to ear guard placement and sizing. 

Below is a pic of a Wilson WTA3007 for example. If you look at its ear guards, you'll know that this is NOT a Nike.  Nike uses that extra wide ear guard - and the arrow strut on the top of both guards is more defined on a Nike mask.  Wilson (as shown below) rounds the top ear guard down - whereas Nike is straight out from the mask in a 90-degree perpendicular (imaginary) line from the dead center of the mask.  Finally, Wilson's bottom ear guard is rounded more versus Nike has a more angular shape, especially at the bend on the bottom of the ear guards.

wta3007 back.jpg

wta3007.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

57 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

@wolfe_man I can confirm that the one with TW is a Wilson. The two masks from JoHart are noticeably different on the angle of the U bar, no? 

Here is the link the silver mask with TW pads.  This was MadMax mask and he called it a Nike Steel.  This is where I looked before I purchased it to make sure, but then second-guessed myself. :)

http://umpire-empire.com/topic/65819-fs-nike-steel-mask-bright-silver-mipc-nike-harness/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright guys, here is where I have to eat a few of my own words. That image of a silver mask with black TW pads against a beige wall with sand-tan carpeting is mine. I claimed it was a Nike Steel because that’s what I had bought it from another guy here on U-E as (I don’t remember who, and frankly, don’t feel that it’s relevant anymore).

I know the Nike “Icon” planform so very well, as it was designed by someone at Nike at the behest of Jorge Posada in the early days of his HoF (likely to be) career. It was styled to have simple lines, and give an excellent field of view. The chin guard was made taller (longer) than every other mask on the market at that time because Posada made it a trendsetter to prop the mask on his head, like a knight’s flip-up visor, and he eschewed wearing a dangling throat guard. To be strong enough to withstand the battering and abuse a catcher’s mask takes, and to be thin and lightweight enough to forgo thick vinyl cladding, it was fabricated in titanium. To Posada’s wishes, the chin guard was tall and featured very little forward rake (the angle at which that shape projects off the vertical plumb line) so it would behave like a dangling throat guard, easpecially when a catcher is trained to drop his chin when blocking a ball down off the deck. Now, here’s the important part – I have been unable to determine which was first; Wilson’s Catcher’s DynaLite (with arrowhead ear struts) and Nike based their design planform on it, or Wilson produced theirs in response to Nike’s iconic Titanium getting so much attention in the catching community.

Of course, producing a mask in titanium incurs a rather premium cost. So, the next best alternative (at that time) for mass production was steel. In order to give the mask better survivability to corrosion and the constant physical abuse, the hollow steel masks were dipped in vinyl. Even in this construct, the two masks looked vaguely similar, but they still retained their unique characteristics; namely, the shape of the “bullring and wicket”, and the size and rake of the chin guard. Why were the two chinguards so different? That’s best answered with another question – between Nike and Wilson, who sells (thousands upon thousands) more dangling throat guards as accessory purchases? Why, Wilson of course.

At some point, Wilson changed their ear struts from arrowheads to single, simple horizontal bars (I have been unable to determine when, or for what specific reason). At around this same time, Wilson introduced their new West Vest CP model variant – the Platinum – in conjunction with a titanium version of their DynaLite, perhaps at the behest of MLB umpires who had taken a liking to Posada’s (and other Nike-supplied catchers’) mask. It had similar lines to Wilson’s DynaLite, with the more-pinched, angular bullring and wicket U-Bars and single bar ear struts. The big, glaring difference was the dramatic forward rake of the chin guard. This was certainly intended to allow a dangling throat guard to be mounted behind it. Accordingly, the Platinum CP received a padded cushion so a dangling throat guard would bounce against it instead of clacking.

Keep in mind, though, that the companies are still producing and supplying masks to wholesale and retail outlets in any and all planforms they have. This would be severely hamstrung by the NFHS board outlawing the traditional mask from use within its ruleset. Nike scaled back their production of their iconic mask in steel, relegating it to supply for college catchers and foreign markets. Alternatively, Wilson ceased production of the catcher’s version of the DynaLite, instead forging ahead with the updated DynaLite planform for its captive market – umpires.

So, through researching all that, I have since arrived at the conclusion that that mask I had was a Wilson DynaLite-for-Catcher, having been stripped of its vinyl and powdercoated. To make matters more complicated, it looks like the exclusive contract between Nike and the shop in Asia (Taiwan?) where the Icon was produced has ended, and recently the shop has been producing Icons, in Titanium and Steel, with a variety of pad branding on them (Reebok, Adidas, etc.). A few MLB catchers, too, sponsored by Mizuno, have taken to putting Mizuno pads on a titanium Icon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for the sake of conversation, not argument. I took some more pics of this "Nike" next to my DynaLite's A3007 and A3008.  This "Nike" mask is wider and shorter than the DynaLite's. 

I am still convinced my OP is a Nike - but I think the original steel models used a slightly wider U-bar/bullring/wicket at the bottom than the current models. Perhaps it was a different supplier than current? I know the current models of steel and Ti are the same, but the older models were not always that way.

Lastly, the new-to-me mask is noticeably lighter than my DynaLite catcher's models, even with TW pads on it.

The "Nike" is wider (11" DL vs 12" N), shorter (14" DL vs 13" N), has bigger/wider "ears" and has a longer & straighter "chin" than the DynaLite (see pics). 

I'll have to split up the pics due to sizing unfortunately.

IMG_2386.JPG

IMG_2384.JPG

IMG_2383.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately, I'm fine with it being either Wilson or Nike as I like it, but in my quest to understand I am exploring all the possibilities.  I not only want to understand what it is now, but if I see another one come up for sale then I want to know if I should be paying Wilson or Nike prices! :)

In my humble opinion, my mask is clearly different from the Wilson DynaLite catcher models A3007, A3008 and A3010.  I have stripped vinyl off about 6-7 of the Wilson's because I think they are very close to the Nike's and I can normally pick them up on eBay for under $40 shipped.  Once you remove the vinyl these masks really lighten up - you would be amazed at how much of a difference it makes!  These old Wilson DynaLite catcher models A3007 and A3008 are very solid masks that offer a good view for a great price.  I'd encourage you to pick one up to play with over the winter months if you see one. 

However, with all of this discussion and experience, I still believe the mask in my OP is a Nike Steel.  It has different dimensions and looks and feels different than the Wilson's that I own and have held, so I'm going to call it my Nike.

Thanks to all of you whom have weighed in and offered feedback/ideas.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

I'm going to resurrect this old thread because I came across another one of these last week and scooped it up.  Let me state right up front, I'm not interested in starting an argument or proving anyone is right or wrong.  This is merely a topic for discussion, if you desire to have it, and an opportunity to learn.

To those who feel that these are Wilson masks, then why do they all seem to come with Nike pads and harnesses?  Yes, we can all see the bottom wicket (inverted U) that appears so typical of Wilson masks; but we can also see the ear-guards that no Wilson mask ever had too.  

This particular mask weighs in about 1.3 lbs WITH the vinyl and pads still on it.  That's way lighter than any Wilson vinyl covered mask that I've held.  The dimensions are off also. If you read above, then you know this is wider and shorter than a Wilson mask.  The chin guard is angled more up and down than any Wilson I've ever held or seen also.

I found this particular mask to be very interesting, even more so than others I've had. 

  1. There is a promo tag on it.  I've had several Nike Ti's and a couple of Nike steels before, but I've never seen this tag on them.  This proves that Nike gives them away (promotion) for their sponsored catchers as we all knew, but the fact that there is a tag saying so makes me think this was one of their first models/promos.
  2. Tag says made in Thailand - not Japan/China/Taiwan as the Nike Ti's are (and where I supposed the college steels were also made).
  3. It was made in 2005 - this is towards the middle of Jorge Posada's career.  It was around this time when he went to Nike to create what we now know as the Nike Titanium.

I realize that Nike hasn't kept records, or isn't willing to release them at least, of the Nike mask platforms.  Therefore, we're all left to wonder if this is truly a Nike or a Wilson.  I know what I think, but I'm curious if anyone has any hard evidence or proof to fully convince me of it being either one?  Opinions are just that, I'd like facts if anyone has them.  I can find old photos of Nike-branded masks that appear very similar, but that isn't hard proof either.

If not, then this is going to have to be one of this "I feel" times when we all are left to believe what we believe. 

 

Nike NRS 3.jpg

Nike NRS 4.jpg

Nike NRS 5.jpg

Nike promo tag.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some side-by-side photos of an Adidas next to this "Nike" mask. 

I know the bottom wicket (U-bar) has the appearance of what we've come to know as Wilson, but those ear-guards are not like any Wilson I've seen.  Is it possible this was the first version of the Nike and they had only made two fixes (wider ear-guards and straighter chin-guard angle) at the time of this masks production? 

The top U-bar (wicket) is also a bit smaller and more pinched than the Adidas.

Reminder:  I have already done side-by-side photos above for Wilson vs. "Nike".

Nike vs Adidas comp 3.jpg

Nike vs Adidas comp 4.jpg

Nike vs Adidas comp 5.jpg

Nike vs Adidas comp 6.jpg

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lastly, photos from the side to show the "rake" or angle of the fixed chin-guard on an Adidas and the "Nike".  Notice that the blue frame has a straighter chin-guard than even the Adidas, which is based off the most recent Nike Ti platform.

Nike vs Adidas comp 1.jpg

Nike vs Adidas comp 2.jpg

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sent this mask (and the Adidas) off to Tony for a gunmetal powder-coat.  I'll see if the mask looks any different (beyond the obvious) without the vinyl.  Perhaps, it'll offer more clues at that time.

Again, this wasn't posted to start an argument or prove anyone is right or wrong.  This is simply a topic for discussion, but my mind really would love to know, without any doubt, what this truly is.  I'm not sure that we'll ever find out, but I am interested in learning all I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose we can't really reprimand you for restarting a thread that YOU originally started.:D

That that extension is almost bone straight! I'm not sure I have ever seen a mask without at least SOME forward tilt to it!

Have you thought of sending the question, along with photos and other pertinent information, to Nike and see if they could maybe push you in the right direction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BT_Blue said:

I suppose we can't really reprimand you for restarting a thread that YOU originally started.:D

That that extension is almost bone straight! I'm not sure I have ever seen a mask without at least SOME forward tilt to it!

Have you thought of sending the question, along with photos and other pertinent information, to Nike and see if they could maybe push you in the right direction?

I did reach out to them once (no photos) but they won't even acknowledge they have a mask.  I can't get to the right people and they're not going to forward my emails to them either.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wolfe_man said:

I did reach out to them once (no photos) but they won't even acknowledge they have a mask.  I can't get to the right people and they're not going to forward my emails to them either.

Well... THAT SUCKS! And without someone having knowledge of who handles that kind of thing (ala like us knowing the name of the guy at Douglas that handles the refurbs). It is kind of a dead end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
×
×
  • Create New...