Grover Alexander [Archive] - Net54baseball.com Forums

Archive

08-26-2004, 09:03 AM

Posted By: Josh K.  Other than Cracker Jacks, does anyone know what issues Grover Alexander appeared on during his playing career. Preferably one that may be reasonably priced. Thanks.

Archive

08-26-2004, 09:05 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisHere is all you will ever need: <a href="http://members.aol.com/METSBWD/hofers.html" target=_new>http://members.aol.com/METSBWD/hofers.html</a>

Archive

08-26-2004, 09:10 AM

Posted By: Josh K.Thanks Hal.

Archive

08-26-2004, 09:16 AM

Posted By: Greg EcklundThe T222 is Alexander's best card - it doesn't show up too often, but it should run you around $300 on average. If you don't want to pay that much, I would suggest one of the various Exhibit cards or American Caramel cards that he appeared on.

Archive

08-26-2004, 09:24 AM

Posted By: Gilbert MainesI like the w517 issue of 1931. You can obtain an example in reasonably good condition for $50 or so. And it is available in a variety of colors. But Grover Alexander ended his career in 1930 (which is probably the year that his w517 picture was taken, eventho the card was issued in 1931).

Archive

08-26-2004, 09:36 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisI consider his ROOKIE card to be the 1914 Cracker Jack... but I could only find this one for my set: <img src="http://www.lewisbaseballcards.com/classes/baseBallCard/images/429Lg.jpg">

Archive

08-26-2004, 10:24 AM

Posted By: PaulThe T222 Fatima is also one of my favorites. But don't forget the M101-4/5 Sporting News cards of Alexander. They are very nice and certainly cheaper than a Cracker Jack.

Archive

08-26-2004, 11:18 AM

Posted By: Josh K.Its really too bad you had to settle for such an inferior card Hal. Now excuse me while I mop the drool off my floor.

Archive

08-26-2004, 11:38 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisThe funny thing is... as most people on the board can attest... I am STEADFASTLY LOYAL to my collecting goal: HOF ROOKIE CARDS SO ... if we can find a nice graded 1914 Cracker Jack ALEXANDER card for me ... then I will have no problem parting with the 1915 model. EXAMPLE: I just picked up a Shoeless Joe ROOKIE card in the Mastro auction for about $6k... so I am consigning my MORE EXPENSIVE and MUCH higher graded Shoeless Joe card (seen below) in the next Robert Edward Auction: <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1093541889.JPG">

Archive

08-26-2004, 11:50 AM

Posted By: Josh K.Hal, you're killing me here. Next time you find a nice rookie to replace your non-conforming second tier cards, just donate them to me. I will even set myself up as a charitable organization so you can write it off.

Archive

08-26-2004, 11:52 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisOne more and then I will quit. This one will ALSO be in the next Robert Edward auction since it is not a ROOKIE card either: <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1093542771.JPG">

Archive

08-26-2004, 11:54 AM

Posted By: MarkMarry me!

Archive

08-26-2004, 11:57 AM

Posted By: Hal Lewishave some ROOKIE cards that I need ... then we can always explore this "civil union" thing! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

08-26-2004, 12:11 PM

Posted By: ChrisWhat about the 1913 Tom Barker Alexander card? Why dont you consider that his rookie?

Archive

08-26-2004, 12:22 PM

Posted By: jay behrensThe w572 of Alexander is very affordable. It's a photo, not the typical crudely drawn strip card. I picked up a very nice one (about EX, maybe better) last year for $50. Jay I like to sit outside, drink beer and yell at people. If I did this at home I would be arrested, so I go to baseball games and fit right in.

Archive

08-26-2004, 12:25 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisBecause the "1913 Tom Barkers" are not "Trading Cards" for collecting... they are game cards used for playing a baseball game. They were not mass distributed so that they could be collected ... they simply came with the game. Just not a true "baseball card" to me. Just like the ASA graded "photo cut outs" are not "baseball cards."

Archive

08-26-2004, 12:33 PM

Posted By: Josh K.Ok Hal, how about a real nice '68 Bench Rookie in Ex-Mt for that '33 Goudey Ruth - seems like a fair trade to me. Anyone know about how much a 1928 Tharp's Ice Cream Grover Alexander SGC80 would be expected to go for?

Archive

08-26-2004, 12:53 PM

Posted By: Hal Lewisa nice SGC 80 card like that should go for $200 or so.

Archive

08-26-2004, 01:05 PM

Posted By: Josh K.Yeah, I know. I guess the sarcasm/kidding didnt come through in the post.

Archive

08-26-2004, 01:07 PM

Posted By: Josh k.Ignore the last post - I just realized you were answering the question regarding the Tharp Ice Cream card. Sometimes I have difficulty with my reading comprehension skills.

Archive

08-26-2004, 01:17 PM

Posted By: PaulAnother relatively cheap Alexander is his W590. It is also a nice photo, not a crude strip card. If you found one, it might be only $75, but they're tough to find. I used to have one from this set listing him with the House of David team, but traded it away. Very sad. The more common variety lists him with the Cubs. There may be a Cardinals version too.

Archive

08-26-2004, 01:35 PM

Posted By: Josh AHal, I will have to agree with Josh K, fantastic cards!! I would be happy as well to accept those other "cast off" cards that you are donating to Mastro! I will do the paperwork for the Charitable organization, Josh K., being that I'm a newly minted attorney looking for work! Seriously though, those are some beautiful cards. I've been looking for a Jackson RC for some time, and I'd be happy to trade my 65 Mantle for your '15 Johson, being that it's not a "true" rookie! haha!!! "I had a better year." Babe Ruth, on why he got paid more than the President of the United States.

Archive

08-26-2004, 10:44 PM

Posted By: Andy BaranThe Tom Barker / National Game cards of Alexander are his ROOKIE cards. How can you say that these are not "trading cards" when you consider Mordecai Brown's ROOKIE card to be from the Fan Craze Set? (We both know that his real ROOKIE card is from the Alleghany Set) <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> You should thank me. Now you can buy a Tom Barker or National Game Alexander relatively inexpensively, and sell your Cracker Jack Alexander for a nice profit.

Archive

08-26-2004, 11:09 PM

Posted By: The Other One (Julie)or whatever it's called--that PURPLE thing!--how could you as it were trade the Boston Store in on it?" Or do you consider the Red Border his rookie? That's a nice one, too.

Archive

08-27-2004, 08:15 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisIt pains me so much to see the AWESOME image of Joe Jackson in his BLACK uniform going off to the auction block... but if it brings in what it deserves, it will help me towadrs my goal of getting a T206 Wagner (I know, I know ... it's NOT a rookie card either!) Hopefully all of you guys are ready to bid HARD and HEAVY on the incredible Boston Store card with that GREAT "Black Sox" photo!! <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14> And YES ... I replaced it with the "purple thing" that looks no more like Joe Jackson that it does Reggie Jackson or Andrew Jackson. <img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

08-27-2004, 10:53 AM

Posted By: Andy BaranYou never explained how a Fan Craze card could be a ROOKIE card, but a Tom Barker or National Game card could not. I'm dying to hear this argument. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

08-27-2004, 11:22 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisTo me, the distinction lies in the comparison of the DATES of the cards and the other issues (or lack of issues) during that time frame. In 1904 and 1906 when Fan Craze was produced, the ONLY set of "real" baseball cards that had been produced in an ENTIRE DECADE (since 1895 Mayo's) was the 1903 Breisch Williams set. Accordingly, for any player who was NOT included in the 1903 set... the Fan Craze cards is the ONLY set of cards in existence that was widely distributed from 1895 until 1908. In contrast, by 1913, A LOT of sets had been produced in the past few years, and a LOT MORE would follow very soon. The presence of a lot of "real" card sets severely diminishes the importance of any "card game" sets. The 1904 Allegheny set, however, is NOT a "baseball card" ONLY because it was NEVER distributed to the public! ONE SET was made as a PROTOTYPE, so how could anyone have "collected" them, then or now? If someone can print ONE card and have it "count" as a real baseball card... then I should stop typing this message and start printing some ONE-OF-A-KIND extremely rare baseball cards myself! PS - Since I do NOT have a Grover Alexander rookie card in my collection yet anyway... I reserve the right to change my mind if someone wants to sell me a PSA 10 Tom Barker Alexander card. <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

08-27-2004, 11:27 AM

Posted By: Andy Baran<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

08-27-2004, 11:33 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisHey, just call me Willie McCovey.

Archive

08-27-2004, 11:35 AM

Posted By: leonYou must be a lawyer or something <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-01-2004, 12:09 PM

Posted By: Gilbert MainesSo Hal, Just stretching it a bit further, it could then be concluded that you have established for many pre-war years the card sets which meet your criteria for preference. If this is so, I am interested in a tabulation of this preference, because I too collect cards by year of issuance. My focus is not on rookies, but on records and other historical baseball occurances. And I am constantly wrestling with this type of rationalizations in choosing the card which best represents the occurance.

Archive

12-01-2004, 12:13 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisIf I own a card... it meets my criteria... until and unless I can upgrade to an older and better version... at which time my criteria change. Isn't card collecting grand? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>