T206 team sets......all 36 cards of the CUBS

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>The 1st Series (150) comprises of 15 - Chicago Cubs subjects with their old uniform lettering...."CUBS".<br />The 2nd and 3rd Series cards (issued in 1910) depict the Cubs in their modified uniform with "Chicago"<br /> in vertical lettering.<br /><br />These 15 cards, I have observed to be somewhat tougher than most T206's. This is partially due to the<br /> fact that they are not available on all the usual complement of T-brands, than are most T206's.<br /><br />I am curious if other T206 set collectors on this board have had a tougher time finding these cards ?<br /><br />TED Z <br /><br /><img src="http://www.freephotoserver.com/v001/tedzan/all15cubst206.jpg">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scot Reader</b><p><br />Hi Ted,<br /><br />No doubt these are tougher--probably in large part to the fact that 150-only subjects (to a greater extent) and 150/350 subjects (to a lesser extent) are moderately more difficult than subjects from other series. Also, it takes many collectors a while to learn about the modest Cubs team price premium that attaches to these subjects--which results in them remaining on many collectors' wantlists a little longer than other subjects. What I have always liked most about these subjects is that they are the only ones in the T206 set that exhibit a team nickname--an obvious tribute to the popularity of the Chicago Nat'l ballclub of the era.<br /><br />Scot

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barry arnold</b><p>TRex,<br /><br />some were certainly tougher for me; in fact, as you know i'm at 500<br />different T206s now and still lack 2 of these.<br />Thankfully, a deal is in the works, though.<br /><br />interesting thread,Ted<br /><br />all the best<br /><br />barry

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DaveW</b><p>I never noticed the connection for this. My original collection was about 80% complete, but I was missing the following:<br /><br />M. Brown Cubs shirt<br />Evers Port<br />Evers Cubs shirt<br />Kling<br />Overall Port<br />Reulbach<br /><br />Many of these were among the last cards I aquired.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>boxingcardman</b><p>I am a particular fan of the portrait cards owing to their uniformity and found collecting them to be relatively expensive unless you are willing to wait a long time and shop around.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>My recollection is that it took a while form me to get Kling and Sheckard in 150. Moran was the last Chicago Cubs card I tracked down, though. He's at the other end of the set.<br /><br />I've been fascinated with Ed Reulbach for years, I got his card among the first couple of dozen T206s I collected. He's the first one I particularly sought out.<br /><br />I've thought Kling is a bit tougher than would normally be expected because I think some of his cards were trashed in the early days. Kling was a hold out one year. I can envision kids, frustrated with him not playing, would have thrown him away. Kid mentality is all about today, yesterday is nothing. When I started collecting, when we started, we'd focus on the new cards, and forget about the old ones from the year before. (I think that applies to the Powers card, too.)<br /><br />One of the beautiful aspects to having the cards ungraded is the ability to lay those cards beside one another, getting them out of alphabetical order, and laying them out in series. That's the way to see "Cubs" across the shirt, or "Chicago" down the front.<br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scot Reader</b><p><br />Agree with Frank that the cards look great together in Ted's post.<br /><br />I forgot how nice a T206 group can look when organized by team.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>incredibly relevant for me, as a T206 Cubs collector, although I will be upfront in saying that:<br />1) I don't collect the backs, at least not yet, so I can't add much to that discussion<br />2) most of what I have collected thus far has been SGC graded (for reasons of authenticity protection mostly, since I'm a newbie.<br /><br />great info and thanks for the great scan of lined up cards.<br /><br />Personally, from those I have seen so far, I think I like those with the combination jersey (Cubs logo + vertical Chicago lettering), -see Moran, Hofman, Pfeister (Seated)...<br /><br />Here's my still-paltry collection: <a href="http://www.freewebs.com/chisywact/vintagechicagocubs.htm" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.freewebs.com/chisywact/vintagechicagocubs.htm</a><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Ten more "Cubbies".....from the 350 & 460 series.<br /><br /><br /><img src="http://www.freephotoserver.com/v001/tedzan/a10cubs350.jpg"><br /><br />TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Ten more to complete the display of the 35 subjects that represent the CUBS from this set.<br /><br /><br /><img src="http://www.freephotoserver.com/v001/tedzan/b10cubs460.jpg"><br /><br /><br />TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Anyone want to venture a guess as to why 4 cards of Tinker....while just 3 cards of Chance or Evers ?<br /><br />TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Frank Evanov</b><p>Nice cards Ted. I have had much difficulty obtaining both Evers cards and the Tinker portrait 1st series cards for my T206 HOF set. The Chance and the Brown cards were fairly easy to find.<br><br>Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>I show here 35 cards of the Chicago Cubs form the T206 set.....actually there are 36.<br /><br />I left out Rube Kroh.<br /><br />TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>not sure why 4 Tinkers? but it has always erked me that he has a bat off & bat on pose, way too similiar, a waste of a design.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>When you study the T206 set, it's obvious that its designers "loved" the NY Giants and the Chicago Cubs.<br /><br />There are 52 subjects representing the Giants....and, 36 subjects representing the Cubs.<br /><br />And, these designers were no "dummies" when they started planning this set....as the Giants and Cubs ruled<br /> the day in Major League BB.<br /><br />The Cubs won the Nat. Lge. pennant: 1906....1907....1908....1910. And, were World Champs in 1907 & 1908.<br /><br />TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>Was Tinker team captain??? 4 cards for that? Popular player...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ed</b><p>I believe Joe Tinker may be the least deserved member of the hall of fame (fame by association). Still, he is the finest T206 that I own. I think he might get an 8 or 9, but I'm afraid of taking him out of the screw down holder he has occupied for the last 20+ years. If he breaks in half when I open it, are there any cubs counselling groups I could attend? Maybe Bartman has started one?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Back in my working days I had a lot of business trips to the Chicago area and it really surprised me <br />how most of the people I met and worked with were Cub fans....and only a few were Sox fans.<br /><br />So, what team do you Net54 Chicago members favor ?<br /><br />TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>In terms of "numbers", Chance probably best qualifies, of these three, to be in the HOF. Their #'s.....<br /><br />Chance....1b....17 year career....BA = .297<br /><br />Evers....,..2b....17 year career....BA = .270<br /><br />Tinker.......ss....15 year career....BA = .263<br /><br />All three were inducted into the HOF in 1946.<br /><br />They were elected in 1945....WWII had ended, and there was Cub "fever" throughout the country.<br />The theme was "Tinker to Evers to Chance" and the Cubs became the NL Champs and fought the<br /> Tigers in the World Series to 7 games.<br /><br />TED Z <br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>As for stats, Tinker never even led the Cubs in hitting, Evers did once and Chance 4 times; Chance twice led the team in RBIs, Tinker once, Evers never; Chance is the ALLTIME Cub stolen base leader (304), Tinker 3rd...other than SB's none of the three appear in the top ten leaders of any major Cub offensive category! Career season high for HR's both Tinker and Chance an amazing 6...<br /><br />Chance gave up the game because his eye-sight was shot from being beaned so many times, it's well known that he collapsed on the field frequently from headaches and temporary losses of vision and blackouts.."The Crab" Evers of course suffered the much publicized bouts with depression that ended with his nervous breakdown..he and Tinker did not even speak to each other from 1909...<br /><br />All three notably were popular team managers, the most successful definitely Chance...some credence to his managerial success certainly carried some HOF weight, as did his overall statistics. He merits the Hall. Tinker and Evers...one has to wonder!!<br /><br />I would venture to guess the 4 cards for Tinker may have been based on player popularity and fan appeal, by far he was the favorite of the three. Evers, not Joe, was team captain during the majority of the era..

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>dennis</b><p>ted i am a white sox fan. i do believe the cubs have more casual fans and women tend to embrace the cute cubby image. wrigley is the largest beer garden in the city and tends to draw a lot of young people.remember the north side of chicago is much more affluent than the south side. white sox fans are jealous of the cubs continued popularity in spite of the lackluster teams they tend to field. in terms of real fans i still believe the cubs rule but the gap is much smaller. sox fans seem to dwell on the cubs while cub fans tend to just ignore the southsiders. the cubs have a great history and up until the 2nd world war were one of the "best" teams in the NL. the sox after the banishment of many of their star players fielded losing teams from 1921 thru 1951. that did not help to get new fans.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>sean</b><p>Joe Tinker was known as the best man to come through in the clutch of anyone in baseball at that time. Sometimes lifetime records don't necessarily show how good a player really was. It was Tinker's help that got the cubs through to the series in many tight races (especially the '08 series). It also helps that the cubs had the tightest infield of anyone else. That coupled with Kling catching made it very tough to get hits through the infield.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>If you take their raw numbers and calculate their Runs Produced Index (RPI), both Chance and Tinker<br />had to be dependable hitters in the "clutch".<br /><br />Chance has an RPI of a Run/3.5 AB<br /><br />Tinker has an RPI of a Run/4.0 AB<br /><br />This statistic does not exactly tell the story (as you have alluded to); but, is quite indicative over an<br /> entire career of the clutch hitting of a given ballplayer.<br /><br />TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>sean</b><p>Id be surious to see Tinker's stats for the period of 1906-1910. Generally, the cubs were in close contention (ecept in '06) with the giants to get to the series and Tinker was one of the very few people who had Mathewson's number. Since Mathewson was most likely called in for the important games, it was Tinker's hitting that pushed them past the Giants. Even though he didnt have a great managing career, I think It says something that the reds trusted his talent to put him in that position in '13. That on top of te fed's wanting him as much as they did (maybe cause he was more willing to jump than most or maybe for true talent Im not sure?).

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>I have most of the Spalding BB Guides from 1905 to 1914, so (probably tomorrow), I will post Tinker's<br /> stats from 1906 - 1910. I will look at some of the other players, also....and post their #'s if they look<br /> impressive.<br />Those were great years for the Cubs and it will be interesting to see their numbers during that period.<br /><br />TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>I'll save you the hunt Ted, have them right here. By the way, a great book for a Cubs' fan....<br /><br />TINKER '06 (148 games played)<br />523 At Bats, 122 hits, 18 2B, 4 3B, 1 HR, 75 Runs, 64 RBI, 30 SB and .233 avg<br /> <br />1907: 117 games, 402 AB, 89 hits, 11 2B, 3 3B, 1 HR, 36 Runs, 36 RBI, 20 SB and .221 <br /><br />1908: 157 Games, 548 AB, 146 Hits, 23 2B, 14 3B, 6 HR, 67 Runs, 68 RBI, 30 SB, .266<br /><br />1909: 143 G, 516 AB, 132 hits, 26 2B, 11 3B, 4 HR, 56 Runs, 57 RBI, 23 SB, .256<br /><br />Lower avg, than BOTH Chance and Crab in each of the 4 seasons...less stolen bases than each in each season except '08 when his 30 was 2nd to Crab's 36...did lead the others twice in RBI's<br /><br />Love the Cubs and love Joe Tinker, but sorry, don't think his credentials stand up to Frank's...possibly to The Crab's...but do not think they are HOF caliber..<br /><br />WHOOPS, forgot 1910: 133 games, 473 AB, 136 hits, 25 2B, 9 3B, 3HR, 48 Runs, 69 RBI, 20 SB, .288 avg.(highest of his career)

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>sean</b><p>I still absolutely believe he deserves his spot in the HOF. Again, for the reason that he helped them in the clutch. By clutch I mean, in the very important pennant games. These are the kind of records that dont show up in typical recods but do prove his worth towards helping the cubs get to 4 world series in 5 years.<br />Evers I admire because he went from a dead daughter and a nervous breakdown to helping the braves in 1914. There is also a lot to be said about playing for the team (with sacrifices, going for one base at a time, etc.). This def. bring a players average down but helps for the good of the game. I remember reading of one pennant game (I dont remember which as I have no books with me) where Tinker bunted 3 times in one game. I always was kinna impressed that a fellow who coul dhit the dead ball pretty well would go for sacrifices that many times in one very important game.<br />I also believe Johnny Kling contributed just as much if not more than the rest and should be in the hof as well.<br />Anyways, this is just my 2 cents.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Thanks for the stats......my 100 yr old Spalding Guides are getting pretty worn, so you spared me<br /> from flipping thru their pages.<br /><br />Question for you....in those winning years (1906 - 1910) where did Tinker, Evers, and Chance bat<br />in the line-up ?<br /><br />Also, the 1908 season has to be the Cubs best, and the most exciting. Your Cubs won the NL pen-<br />nant on the last day. Matty won 37 games for the Giants. For the Cubs, M. Brown won 29 and Ed<br /> Reulbach had his best year (24-7).<br /><br />You want to give us some more details regarding that great season ?<br /><br />TED Z<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>Ted--aside from injuries..this was pretty much the "standard" Cub batting order for the '08 season:<br />Jimmy Sheckard<br />Johnny Evers<br />Frank Chance<br />Harry Steinfeldt<br />Solly Hofman/Jimmy Slagle (Slagle was often lead-off depending on line-up)<br />Joe Tinker<br />Johnny Kling<br />Pitcher<br /><br />Agree, had to be considered most "exciting" season, winning on Merkle's controversial Boner on the last day. Reulbach was 24-7 with 2 no-hitters, and highest league win % for 3rd straight year. Evers .300 led team. Mordecai was 29-9, 1.47 ERA. Team BA was 5th in the league @ .247.<br />Overall season record 99-55<br /><br />Think the best had to be the '06 team that finished 116-36, a 20 game win margin over McGraw's Giants, the defending champs. Led the league in team batting, team batting, team fielding, and had 29 shutouts... <br /><br /> <br />