View Single Post
  #74  
Old 06-21-2010, 07:57 AM
Clutch-Hitter's Avatar
Clutch-Hitter Clutch-Hitter is offline
G.r.eg M@r.t.i.n
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The South
Posts: 770
Default Thanks James, Great Points

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGallo View Post
Greg,

I bought a very large group of stirp cards from a NY auction, I mean close to 100+ all in one lot. I think there were 3 big heads might have been 4. If this was a NY issure I would of expected a lot more. Also I think we would see the Ruth card more if it was a local NY think and that card does not show up at all.

I have always thought of the set as being "made up" meaning that nothing really was made to match and that it was more of a generic looking set.

I think by doing less work on the set it would have cost less to make and if someone just wanted to do thi fast and on the cheap this is the type of product that would have come out.

Back the Ruth, those apear to be Red sleeves and socks, so that would put him with the Sox and not Yankees right? Can't we use this to narrow that date. Since he is in a hitting pose and not pitching it would likely have been late in his Sox days when he was moving from pitching to hitting.

I think the best chance to id the date is the uniforms, but if things were done so roughly I am not sure they would be acurate anyway. This might just be one of those things we never id or confirm a date on like the 1915 W-Unc.

James G
The artist did depict the players in uniforms, but the uniforms were not intended to accurately match the real life uniforms. The intent of the make-believe uniforms was to have Yankees and Giants stand out from the rest, which was done with large, bold red/white pin stripes. Everyone else was dressed in plain uniforms.

The fact that Ruth and Mays are not wearing those bold red/white pin stripes indicates Ruth had not yet made the switch, but as you said, had established himself as a hitter.

The fact that Bodie is wearing the pin stripes dates this issue post-1918, so either 1919-1920. Your points make me lean toward 1920 firmly.

The quantity of the Big Heads in your New York find sounds correct to me, and actually makes me further believe New York. In general, in my experience, there are not three Big Heads for every 100 frequently seen strip cards, such as w516. The scarcity of the set leads me to believe local (regional) only distribution, and if that is the case, New York IMO is a no doubter because of those bold stripes. However, scarcity is not why I said New York; I said New York because of those uniforms (that weren't really uniforms). The New Yorkers wearing those bold stripes were not superstars like Johnson, Cobb, Sisler (by then), Hornsby, etc, but they were significantly included for a reason, and that reason was because they were local stars (like Paul whats-his-name that played for the Yankees late 90's early2000s). While Paul was an awesome player (anyone who remains in the show as long as he......), he was not a superstar in the country, only in New York. Paul was "adored" in New York.

The "+" symbols on the borders of only nine cards out of twenty cards in the set seems significant. I don't think this set was complete, and your point, that more would have survived if from New York makes sense. I don't think many were made and many that did survived........

Do you have any idea about the "+" symbol? Rice's card was developed out of, or led to the development of, the Sisler card, and because Sisler's card has a "+", and Rice's card didn't, it may indicate that one or the other was added after the fact in order to make the set larger with well known players included from other teams.

Your point from a couple months ago, specifically that Schalk is the only Black Sox player, also makes 1920 more firm in my mind.

I am firm on this also: The heads were magnified so the faces, including the details of the faces, could be seen and identified. But like Matt said (and my wife), it appears the drawings were completed first, then the names later, which led to mis-identification.

I've been thinking that other than the wrong names on the pictures, the art was well done, with the intended cartoonish effect.

Those "+" symbols; if we could figure those out............But the date seems crystal...

Thanks James
Reply With Quote