Second year cards that look more appealing then the Rookie

[Rookiemonster]

Doing some browsing on eBay . I noticed that some rookies are not as appealing as the second year card . Now this is a matter of taste of course . I'll go first ( there are a few that seem obvious 1952 mantle

1956 Topps sandy Koufax .

1955 Bowman Hank Aaron .

[jkray25]

Error

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk

[Robs70sCards]

I'll take 1970 to 1971 Topps Thurman Munson for the win.... :D

[arexcrooke]

I've always liked Mike Schmidts 1974 2nd year card over his 73 rookie.
Then you've got the 52 Topps Mantle. It might be more appealing than his 51 Bowman rookie.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The Rose RC has to be the worst looking card out there.

[JollyElm]

I'll take the opposite tack and present a case where the second year card is just an abomination. After a fine rookie portrait, Topps decided to picture Brooksie in what could only be described as mid-sneeze form in 1958.

217923

[Mark70Z]

I'll take the opposite tack and present a case where the second year card is just an abomination. After a fine rookie portrait, Topps decided to picture Brooksie in what could only be described as mid-sneeze form in 1958.217923

Come on Darren that's "almost" an awesome picture! :D

[jasonc]

I find the appearance of a multi-player rookie card vs their second year card would fit this category.

1969 Topps Nolan Ryan > 1968 Topps

One that people do not mention is the Steve Carlton. I like the pitching pose of the 1966 card vs the multi-player rookie card of him. Plus there are many others:

Like what was mentioned the Rose, Munson, Schmidt etc.

[Rookiemonster]

I'll take the opposite tack and present a case where the second year card is just an abomination. After a fine rookie portrait, Topps decided to picture Brooksie in what could only be described as mid-sneeze form in 1958.

217923

Eli manning face ! Yeah that's a bad pic . All of these are awesome .

Jasonc you are correct imo I also feel these way about 1968 1969 Johnny bench . But it's not that the first is terrible . It's that the 1969 is just great .....

[Gr8Beldini]

Doing some browsing on eBay . I noticed that some rookies are not as appealing as the second year card . Now this is a matter of taste of course . I'll go first ( there are a few that seem obvious 1952 mantle

1956 Topps sandy Koufax .

1955 Bowman Hank Aaron .

+1 on the Bowman Aaron.

[Harford20]

Upon reading the title, the Pete Rose and Johnny Bench immediately came to mind. The 1964 Rose and the 1969 Bench are "iconic", especially with the Rookie Trophy on the card.

[Mountaineer1999]

Doing some browsing on eBay . I noticed that some rookies are not as appealing as the second year card . Now this is a matter of taste of course . I'll go first ( there are a few that seem obvious 1952 mantle

1956 Topps sandy Koufax .

1955 Bowman Hank Aaron .

I literally had a post almost identical to this one typed up yesterday and got busy and didn't finish. I have started a HOF collection, and since I cannot afford HOF Rookie cards for the most part, I look for cards of the player (any year) I like. There are a few exception but the rookie card is rarely their best card appearance wise. As mentioned above, I hate most of the shared rookie cards.

[ALR-bishop]

As Darren and others pointed out in an earlier thread, it gets complicated when a player has multiple cards designated as rookie cards. Bill Davis had 5 multiple player rookie cards, but no stand alone cards. Piniella has 3 multiple player rookie cards. Cey and Murphy had more than one, and Gaylord Perry had a stand alone card in 62 and then a "rookie card" in 63

I vote for Rose as the best 2nd year improvement

[Rookiemonster]

I literally had a post almost identical to this one typed up yesterday and got busy and didn't finish. I have started a HOF collection, and since I cannot afford HOF Rookie cards for the most part, I look for cards of the player (any year) I like. There are a few exception but the rookie card is rarely their best card appearance wise. As mentioned above, I hate most of the shared rookie cards.

I do this for a hand full of players ( or trying to ) so are just nice looking cards .
Then there's some rookies that like well if I want his rookie then this is it lol .

But I find the second year has some appeal to as the earlest estheticly appealing card . At least in some cases . And while it doesn't add value I feel like there is some kind of value in it .

[Cliff Bowman]

From an ugly Phillie (yechh) to a beautiful Cub.

[ALR-bishop]

Cliff--- amazing that with all the great players the Cubs had in those years they did not win more :)

When you gave us Brock for Broglio in 63' we did our best to pass it on by sending sending Carlton to the Phillies for Rick Wise.

[DBesse27]

The guy I collect is Yaz and I prefer his 61 Topps over his 1960 RC.

[pokerplyr80]

The first two that came to mind for me are Ryan and Rose.

[WillBBC]

'69 Topps Johnny Bench is a beautiful card. Not a big fan of the '68.

Completely agree with the Munson!

[Peter_Spaeth]

I find the appearance of a multi-player rookie card vs their second year card would fit this category.

1969 Topps Nolan Ryan > 1968 Topps

One that people do not mention is the Steve Carlton. I like the pitching pose of the 1966 card vs the multi-player rookie card of him. Plus there are many others:

Like what was mentioned the Rose, Munson, Schmidt etc.

There is no 1966 Carlton.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I'll take the opposite tack and present a case where the second year card is just an abomination. After a fine rookie portrait, Topps decided to picture Brooksie in what could only be described as mid-sneeze form in 1958.

217923

The 58 Frank is no gem either.

[jasonc]

There is no 1966 Carlton.

Wow, you're right it's the 1967 topps, I guess that doesn't count, but it is his 2nd topps card :/

[JollyElm]

It's usually overlooked or not known about, but Rose's 1964 card uses the very same (differently cropped) photo as his rookie card…

218002

[jb67]

Interesting bit of info. I never realized it. Thanks for sharing.

It's usually overlooked or not known about, but Rose's 1964 card uses the very same (differently cropped) photo as his rookie card…

218002

[jb67]

No doubt that Bench came to mind right away for me along with Rose. Dan I agree with you regarding Yaz's second year card. I have always liked it better.

<a href="http://imgur.com/XMCwOMR"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/XMCwOMR.jpg?1" title="source: imgur.com" /></a><a href="http://imgur.com/mZjiLPh"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/mZjiLPh.jpg?2" title="source: imgur.com" /></a>

[tedzan]

http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan77/images/large/1960x1961Yaz50x.jpg


Yaz's first two Topps cards were printed using a photo of him when he was at Notre Dame.


TED Z
.

[arexcrooke]

On the Yaz it's the same picture for 60 and 61

[Brianruns10]

Poor Hoyt Wilhelm. His '53 card isn't one of the best in the bunch, but it's a damned sight better than his rookie card. I mean at least in the 53 his eyes are open!

[brian1961]

It's usually overlooked or not known about, but Rose's 1964 card uses the very same (differently cropped) photo as his rookie card…

218002

Good subject. The first card that came to my mind is the one Darren chose. An exceptional argument winner to the concept of never letting a rookie card get in the way of a powerful, extremely well-designed and rendered second-year or later card. --Brian Powell

[ALR-bishop]

Through the 50s and 60s Topps often used the same photos over and over. There have been some good articles, including some by Olberman, about why that happened in some cases. Money in one way or another was the main reason. Later, Marvin Miller ( plus money again) another

[brian1961]

THE APPALLING REPETIOUSNESS OF TOPPS IS NOTHING SHORT OF BLATANT WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR HOCKEY ISSUES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE HOCKEY PRODUCTION WAS 18 TO 1, COMPARED WITH BASEBALL. I THINK THAT'S A STRETCH FOR THEIR EARLY YEARS; IT PROBABLY REFLECTS PRODUCTION FROM WHEN TOPPS HOCKEY BECAME MAINSTREAM--1968-69-ONWARDS.

MY FAVORITE PLAYER GROWING UP IN THE SUBURBS OF CHICAGO WAS BOBBY HULL, NATURALLY. I DIDN'T DISCOVER HOCKEY CARDS UNTIL ABOUT 1966, THROUGH THE MAIL ORDER FIRM OF THE TRADING CARD COMPANY (FARMINGTON HILLS, MICHIGAN). OUR AREA NEVER GOT ANY WAX PACKS UNTIL THE 1968-69 SERIES, AND I WAS IN A HOTBED OF DISTRIBUTION.

A CARD I ABSOLUTELY ADORE IS THE 1961-62 TOPPS BOBBY HULL. After 3 years of using the same photo, they chose a great shot to go with their dazzling design of that year. I never bothered going after Bobby's first three cards, preferring just to revere his fourth year gem. Though Topps repeated the photo for 63-64, their design was so dissimilar to 61-62 it made for a good card.

Just my nickel-pack's worth, as again I write more than 2 cents.:o

--Brian Powell

[ALR-bishop]

Feel better Brian ? :)

[Brianruns10]

Through the 50s and 60s Topps often used the same photos over and over. There have been some good articles, including some by Olberman, about why that happened in some cases. Money in one way or another was the main reason. Later, Marvin Miller ( plus money again) another

Poor Wes Westrum...Topps used the same photo of him on EVERY issue.

[Rookiemonster]

Yogi Berra 1949 oh what a difference some color can make

[brian1961]

Feel better Brian ? :)

Thanks, Al.

Yeah, I get on my high horse sometimes. Got bucked off pretty bad last Friday. My dear mother-in-law died. She was going down fast, but at 88, well, it doesn't matter, our family will miss her terribly. She raised a wonderful daughter and future wife for me.

Gotta go be with family.

Best regards, to all youse guys. ---Brian Powell

[Vintagevault13]

Thanks, Al.



Yeah, I get on my high horse sometimes. Got bucked off pretty bad last Friday. My dear mother-in-law died. She was going down fast, but at 88, well, it doesn't matter, our family will miss her terribly. She raised a wonderful daughter and future wife for me.



Gotta go be with family.



Best regards, to all youse guys. ---Brian Powell


Brian,

Sorry about the loss of your mother-in-law. Praying for your family.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[KCRfan1]

Thanks, Al.

Yeah, I get on my high horse sometimes. Got bucked off pretty bad last Friday. My dear mother-in-law died. She was going down fast, but at 88, well, it doesn't matter, our family will miss her terribly. She raised a wonderful daughter and future wife for me.

Gotta go be with family.

Best regards, to all youse guys. ---Brian Powell


Sorry for your loss Brian.

[ALR-bishop]

Especially hard on a woman when she looses her mom. Time for the family to circle the wagons in support

[paulcarek]

1979 Topps Paul Molitor. That is all.

[Bigdaddy]

Rose or Munson, it should be put to a vote.

[ullmandds]

56 clemente...55 aaron...topps not bowman...sorry but i hate the tv theme!!!!

definitely munson!!!!!! In fact most of his cards through 74 are better!!!!

You can add the babe to my list too...depending on what u consider his rookie...either works for me!!!!

[the 'stache]

The Munson second year card immediately popped into my head. What a fantastic action shot of the Yankee Captain! I certainly wasn't a fan of the Bronx Bombers growing up, but I liked Thurman Munson a lot. And, that picture is exactly how I remember Munson, fearless behind the late. A part of me wishes the trophy wasn't included, as it obscures part of the photo. But , another part of me says (apparently with a New York accent), "fuhgeddaboudit it, kid. You don't mess with perfection!"

Put me down, also, for the 1979 Topps Paul Molitor. The card itself is a gem, The Ignitor wearing the classic 70s pinstripe uniform, with Tom Meindel's ingenious Brewers logo front and center on the helmet.

[midmo]

Rose, Ryan and Bench for sure. I'd also add Bob Gibson to the list. I'm not really a fan of that pink '59.

[Econteachert205]

82 topps traded ripken