Clean Sweep Auction: 1947 Dodgers "World Series" Ring

[calvindog]

Coming up in the Clean Sweep auction is a "1947 Brooklyn Dodger original World Series ring." The ring is at 4K before the juice right now, with about 11 days left in the auction: http://www.cleansweepauctions.com/item.cgi?show_item=575595

Of course, the Dodgers lost to the Yankees in that WS and the ring is not a World Series championship ring but instead an NL championship ring. This exact ring sold in Heritage last November for $3824 including the juice. Why the much lower price considering it was so recent? Heritage correctly described the ring as a "1947 Brooklyn Dodgers National League Championship Ring." A WS championship ring is a hell of a lot more valuable than a pennant winning ring. Don't get fooled. https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-collectibles/others/1947-brooklyn-dodgers-national-league-championship-ring-presented-to-hap-minor/a/7165-52643.s

[SteveVerkman]

The title has been updated to avoid any confusion.

There is no intent to mislead or trick anyone. We did not claim or imply that this was a World Championship ring.

The Dodgers of course played in the World Series in 1947, hence the creation of the ring. We never claimed that the Dodgers won the World Series in 1947.

Please feel free to email me with any questions about this lot. Thanks much - Steve Verkman Clean Sweep Auctions info@csauctions.com

[bnorth]

This is still the first line in the description.

Great piece, offered is a truly historic 1947 Brooklyn Dodger original World Series ring.:rolleyes:

[1952boyntoncollector]

If the World Series was never played due to a strike etc., the dodgers still would of been entitled NL ring.

Basically, if you get another ring for playing and losing the world series, i would agree they can call that a 'world series' ring.

[calvindog]

This is still the first line in the description.

Great piece, offered is a truly historic 1947 Brooklyn Dodger original World Series ring.:rolleyes:

Of course, I have yet to see a league championship ring ever described as a World Series ring LOL. That's usually the way auction houses -- and everyone else on the planet -- distinguishes between a World Series championship ring and a league championship ring. But then, of course, that wouldn't help the price surpass a recent sale in Heritage.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/look-check-out-the-mets-national-league-champions-rings/

[Peter_Spaeth]

I would change the description to match the new title, myself, I think it would be more accurate.

[puckpaul]

well, to be fair, the Heritage description later calls it a "Championship ring". ok, i would consider a true "Championship ring" without the "NL" qualifier to be the world series winner. secondly, Clean Sweep says it's a world series ring and immediately says they lost in the next sentence. Heritage makes no mention of losing! I think what the ring is is obvious in Clean Sweep, and title is very clear its an NL Championship ring, which is the same thing as a world series ring when you lose the world series.

splitting hairs here...

[calvindog]

well, to be fair, the Heritage description later calls it a "Championship ring". ok, i would consider a true "Championship ring" without the "NL" qualifier to be the world series winner. secondly, Clean Sweep says it's a world series ring and immediately says they lost in the next sentence. Heritage makes no mention of losing! I think what the ring is is obvious in Clean Sweep, and title is very clear its an NL Championship ring, which is the same thing as a world series ring when you lose the world series.

splitting hairs here...

The original description did not note that Brooklyn lost the WS. And the title originally said World Series ring: "1947 Brooklyn Dodger original World Series ring," nowhere did it say "NL championship ring" or any kind of championship ring: just "World Series ring." Heritage described it as a "1947 Brooklyn Dodgers National League Championship Ring."