Rookie Cards of Baseball Hall of Famers

[Leon]

Originally Posted by triwak

That's fantastic, Derek!!

Agree. Phenomenal clarity.

[h2oya311]

Originally Posted by Leon

Agree. Phenomenal clarity.

Thanks Phil, Ken and Leon!

As for the question about PSA, I would suspect that they would consider his "rookie" card to be from the 1975 TCMA 1927 Yankees set, although it appears that only one Ruppert has been graded thus far by PSA.

[philhjr1]

Originally Posted by h2oya311

Thanks Phil, Ken and Leon!

As for the question about PSA, I would suspect that they would consider his "rookie" card to be from the 1975 TCMA 1927 Yankees set, although it appears that only one Ruppert has been graded thus far by PSA.

thanks you and everyone else on this, and you are indeed correct, after hounding PSA and Beckett again last night and this morning, they did claim that the 1975 TCMA is considered his "rookie" card.

[philhjr1]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

For traditional cards, I would also go with the 1962 Topps. I understand the issue and PSA's position, the same goes for Tom Yawkey's rookie card appearing in the 1959 Fleer Ted Williams set.

Derek's piece is far superior and is one of Ruppert's earliest, if not the earliest, but doesn't qualify as a rookie card.

It's been a long time since I researched this but I recall Ruppert's beer company putting out a premium picturing a couple/few Yankees along with Ruppert. I think it was sometime during the late 1930's, maybe early 1940's. Again, not a card, but a nice option as a career contemporary piece and not as impossible to find as Derek's.

Thanks Phil on the insight as always, I am currently having that very question with PSA/Beckett in regards to the 1959 Fleer Ted Williams Set for Tom Yawkey, at least for that one, they were on the fence on and had to do more "research" on, the Ruppert one, they flat out said no on the spot. Ill report back what the response is.

[dougscats]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb View Post
For traditional cards, I would also go with the 1962 Topps. I understand the issue and PSA's position, the same goes for Tom Yawkey's rookie card appearing in the 1959 Fleer Ted Williams set.

What is the issue? I don't understand PSA's position. Can you explain?
Why wouldn't the '62 Topps Ruppert [or the '59 Fleer Williams] be the rookie card? What is the grading companies' rationale?

Thanks Phil.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Hey Doug:

Although those guys are pictured and identified on the respective cards, they are not solely attributed to them but are looked at more as highlights from Ruth and Williams' careers. Good enough for me, I would stick with those two as rookie cards.

Try to refer PSA to the OldCardboard webpage for Hall of Fame Rookie Cards for Yawkey. Ruppert is not included as he was elected after 2010.

[jimjim]

Any updates for the 2017 induction?

[dougscats]

This is a service message for all members of Net54 who are not familiar with Phil Gary's Hall-of-Fame Rookie Card List.

As a friendly plug, I might also mention that Phil has recently completed writing his "4-Sport Hall of Fame Rookie Cards Guide."
Anyone interested in purchasing a copy can contact him.

Can you give us an update that includes the most recent inductees on this List?

I should be closing in on 100 H-o-F RC's once I get the new guys if they're not too rare.
Thanks, Phil, for your great work.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Thank you for the support, Doug.

For a number of reasons, I am no longer an active collector in the vintage baseball memorabilia arena. I have already sold off my Baseball Hall of Fame Rookies collection and still have a few Negro League pieces left but that's it. I stopped collecting early in 2014 so I have not been keeping up with the more recent HOF inductees nor what their rookie cards might be.

If someone else on the board would like to send me the updated info that would take us from my original 2011 list to the present, I would be happy to add to my master list at the beginning of this thread.

Maybe one day, I'll be able to pick back up again with collecting vintage baseball memorabilia. It was a great 10 year run from 2004 to 2014, including 9 Nationals in a row that I was able to attend. Net54Baseball was a huge part of my daily life as well, providing lots of entertainment and many avenues to further my collection.

[h2oya311]

Phil -

As a recipient of a large portion of your former collection, I am happy to carry on the research and update with the most recent inductees. In fact, I’ve been doing that for a number of years already!

Thank you for all your contributions to date!!

[aljurgela]

Originally Posted by h2oya311

Phil -

As a recipient of a large portion of your former collection, I am happy to carry on the research and update with the most recent inductees. In fact, I’ve been doing that for a number of years already!

Thank you for all your contributions to date!!

+1

[w600]

Alexander.. Hard for me to consider a gaming card a rookie card. I prefer 1914 Fatima/Cracker Jack

Anson...1987 N172 included

Walter Johnson and Tris Speaker... I get it if you want to consider Postcards rookie's I dont.. for me 1909 Ramly/T206 and 1909 T206/Caramel for Speaker.

Christy Matthewson.. 1903 W600 Type 2.. It actually predated Breisch by 6 months.

Wagner.. 1897 Reccius was a promo card.. Still a controversial card.. I respect the Wagner 1902 W600 as Rookie..

Cy Young.. 1890 Ryder Cabinet, 1891-92 Ryder in SCP auction now (first uniform), 1893 Pifer was actually released before Just so. They used Pifer photo for Just so.

Team Cards I also don't count..They were promo for players many times the player didn't even start with the team that year but had a picture in uniform.

Great list..

[triwak]

Originally Posted by h2oya311

Phil -

As a recipient of a large portion of your former collection, I am happy to carry on the research and update with the most recent inductees. In fact, I’ve been doing that for a number of years already!

Thank you for all your contributions to date!!

+2

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by w600

Alexander.. Hard for me to consider a gaming card a rookie card. I prefer 1914 Fatima/Cracker Jack

Anson...1987 N172 included

Walter Johnson and Tris Speaker... I get it if you want to consider Postcards rookie's I dont.. for me 1909 Ramly/T206 and 1909 T206/Caramel for Speaker.

Christy Matthewson.. 1903 W600 Type 2.. It actually predated Breisch by 6 months.

Wagner.. 1897 Reccius was a promo card.. Still a controversial card.. I respect the Wagner 1902 W600 as Rookie..

Cy Young.. 1890 Ryder Cabinet, 1891-92 Ryder in SCP auction now (first uniform), 1893 Pifer was actually released before Just so. They used Pifer photo for Just so.

Team Cards I also don't count..They were promo for players many times the player didn't even start with the team that year but had a picture in uniform.

Great list..

Anson has many cards prior to his 1888 Old Judge(he was not in the 1887 issue ). The earliest I know of is the 1872 Philadelphia NA composite cabinet.The NA was a major league. He also appears in plenty of Chicago cabinets that predate his Old Judge.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by w600

Alexander.. Hard for me to consider a gaming card a rookie card. I prefer 1914 Fatima/Cracker Jack

Anson...1987 N172 included

Walter Johnson and Tris Speaker... I get it if you want to consider Postcards rookie's I dont.. for me 1909 Ramly/T206 and 1909 T206/Caramel for Speaker.

Christy Matthewson.. 1903 W600 Type 2.. It actually predated Breisch by 6 months.

Wagner.. 1897 Reccius was a promo card.. Still a controversial card.. I respect the Wagner 1902 W600 as Rookie..

Cy Young.. 1890 Ryder Cabinet, 1891-92 Ryder in SCP auction now (first uniform), 1893 Pifer was actually released before Just so. They used Pifer photo for Just so.

Team Cards I also don't count..They were promo for players many times the player didn't even start with the team that year but had a picture in uniform.

Great list..

If studio cabinets are included, wouldn't Anson's rookie card be his 1874 Suddards and Fennemore studio cabinet? Here's a link to the card. https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...umbnail-071515

[h2oya311]

Here's my list for Anson:

> 1869 Marshalltown Team Cabinet Photo
> 1869 Notre Dame Team CDV
> 1871 Rockford Forest City's Team Cabinet
> 1872 CDV/Trade Card
> 1872 Philadelphia NA Composite Cabinet
> 1874 Suddard's and Fennemore Cabinet (same images as 1874 Harper's Woodcut)
> 1874 Harper's Weekly Woodcut
> 1879 Robinson Chicago Team Cabinet
> 1886 Lorillard's Chicago Team Cabinet
> 1887 Buchner GC
> 1887-88 Allen & Ginter
> 1888 Old Judge

I'll be setting up a link to all HOFers and the earliest images for each. I'm pretty sure I have an image for each of the items listed above, but if not, I apologize in advance.

[oldjudge]

Derek: also 1882 Chicago Photographic Studio team cabinet. I have an image if you need it. Your list confirms that the 1872 cards are his rookies. The previous ones were not major league appearances.

[aaroncc]

There is a couple different Stevens Cabinets 88-89 I believe.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by h2oya311

Here's my list for Anson:

> 1869 Marshalltown Team Cabinet Photo
> 1869 Notre Dame Team CDV
> 1871 Rockford Forest City's Team Cabinet
> 1872 CDV/Trade Card
> 1872 Philadelphia NA Composite Cabinet
> 1874 Suddard's and Fennemore Cabinet (same images as 1874 Harper's Woodcut)
> 1874 Harper's Weekly Woodcut
> 1879 Robinson Chicago Team Cabinet
> 1886 Lorillard's Chicago Team Cabinet
> 1887 Buchner GC
> 1887-88 Allen & Ginter
> 1888 Old Judge

I'll be setting up a link to all HOFers and the earliest images for each. I'm pretty sure I have an image for each of the items listed above, but if not, I apologize in advance.

I've never seen the 1869 Notre Dame Cdv, nor for that matter ever heard of it. Does anybody have an image?

Is the 1872 Cdv/Trade Card the same image as the 1872 Philadelphia Composite Cabinet? I've seen the Trade Card. If it is not the same image, does anybody have an image of the 1872 Philadelphia composite?

There is an 1874 Philadelphia cabinet, as well as 1876 and 1878 Chicago cabinets.

[barrysloate]

While the 1874 Philadelphia cabinet is Anson's first solo appearance on a photographic card, his first appearance as a professional is on the 1871 Forest Citys of Rockford CdV. Forest Citys was an inaugural team in the National Association, baseball's first professional league.

The problem is we have no clear definition of what a rookie card is.

[orly57]

Originally Posted by w600

Alexander.. Hard for me to consider a gaming card a rookie card. I prefer 1914 Fatima/Cracker Jack

Anson...1987 N172 included

Walter Johnson and Tris Speaker... I get it if you want to consider Postcards rookie's I dont.. for me 1909 Ramly/T206 and 1909 T206/Caramel for Speaker.

Christy Matthewson.. 1903 W600 Type 2.. It actually predated Breisch by 6 months.

Wagner.. 1897 Reccius was a promo card.. Still a controversial card.. I respect the Wagner 1902 W600 as Rookie..

Cy Young.. 1890 Ryder Cabinet, 1891-92 Ryder in SCP auction now (first uniform), 1893 Pifer was actually released before Just so. They used Pifer photo for Just so.

Team Cards I also don't count..They were promo for players many times the player didn't even start with the team that year but had a picture in uniform.

Great list..

You consider a W600 a rookie in the case of Wagner, but a postcard isn't a rookie in the case of Wajo? Other than your handle being W600, what logical reason can you give why a W600 can be a rookie, but a postcard cannot? I am totally fine with considering a W600 a rookie card because I disagree with the sentiment that the card must come in packs or be a certain size to be considered a "card." But it seems like a strange position to take when you say that an oversized premium is a "card" for purposes of assigning a player's rookie, but a postcard is not.

[packs]

In the case of Walter though isn't the postcard in question a minor league issue?

[orly57]

Originally Posted by packs

In the case of Walter though isn't the postcard in question a minor league issue?

Yes and no. The "Weiser Wonder" is a minor league PC, but the 1908 Rose is not. The Rose pre-dates the Ramly.

[w600]

Originally Posted by orly57

You consider a W600 a rookie in the case of Wagner, but a postcard isn't a rookie in the case of Wajo? Other than your handle being W600, what logical reason can you give why a W600 can be a rookie, but a postcard cannot? I am totally fine with considering a W600 a rookie card because I disagree with the sentiment that the card must come in packs or be a certain size to be considered a "card." But it seems like a strange position to take when you say that an oversized premium is a "card" for purposes of assigning a player's rookie, but a postcard is not.

W600 was issued as cards for 9 years. Nothing different than any other card company. The sets and years were defined. They were just oversized.Postcards to me are similar to postcards now. People can take pictures with there family and send letters or greetings. If Mike trout had a postcard 1909 or a page in a magazine in those years, they are not "ROOKIE CARDS"...

Cabinet Cards are a bit different. W600 are not Cabinets. Cabinet Card is similar to how cards are made now. Photo with cardboard back. Although, they have defined sets and stature. Cabinet Cards are loose ends a bit. But if the year in the Cabinet Card matches the rookie year to me its his Rookie Card.

[orly57]

Originally Posted by w600

W600 was issued as cards for 9 years. Nothing different than any other card company. The sets and years were defined. They were just oversized.Postcards to me are similar to postcards now. People can take pictures with there family and send letters or greetings. If Mike trout had a postcard 1909 or a page in a magazine in those years, they are not "ROOKIE CARDS"...

Cabinet Cards are a bit different. W600 are not Cabinets. Cabinet Card is similar to how cards are made now. Photo with cardboard back. Although, they have defined sets and stature. Cabinet Cards are loose ends a bit. But if the year in the Cabinet Card matches the rookie year to me its his Rookie Card.

It sounds to me like you should probably brush up a bit on post cards before making such sweeping commentary. I think you are confusing RPPC's (real photo postcards) with postcards that absolutely have defined sets and years and are catalogued. Like a W600 is a defined set in a catalog, so is the Rose Co (PC760), Novelty Cutlery (pc805) etc. Real photo postcards, on the other hand, were pics taken by individuals and put onto cardboard. Those do not have defined sets or years. But there is a HUGE difference between the two. I think certain RPPCs are great, but I too am a bit bothered by the fact that they aren't from defined sets or years. I don't own any largely for that reason (though I wouldn't mind a 1915 Ruth RPPC too much). But I do own quite a few PCs from legit catalogued sets. The Rose Wajo is most certainly part of a defined set from defined years. And if mike trout had a postcard from 1909, it would definitely be considered a PRE PRE PRE rookie.

[Bicem]

RPPC's can also be from well defined sets like Bregstone, Underwood & Underwood, Rotograph, Cleveland Souvenir Shop etc.

So really two types, private one-off's like Orlando describes above and ones mass produced for sets and promotional reasons.

[oldjudge]

Hi Corey! I have the 1872 Wright and Gould trade card of Philadelphia. That was the composite I was referring to.

[Baseball Rarities]

IMHO, Rose Co. postcards were definitely meant to have been collected like baseball cards at the time. If not, I do not think that the set would have included so many subjects. Production began during the summer of 1908 and originally included 12 members for each of the 16 teams, for a total of 192 different players. They were not only offered individually by retailers, but also in team sets of 12. At the time of production, this was one of the largest and most comprehensive "sets" ever made.

[Baseball Rarities]

Originally Posted by orly57

Yes and no. The "Weiser Wonder" is a minor league PC, but the 1908 Rose is not. The Rose pre-dates the Ramly.

Orlando - the "Weiser Wonder" postcard that you reference was actually issued in 1910. The original real photo postcard (without title) that is pictured below was issued in 1907, before he was known by that nickname.

[Bicem]

I know you've heard it from me before but absolutely incredible postcard.

[Baseball Rarities]

Originally Posted by Bicem

I know you've heard it from me before but absolutely incredible postcard.

Thanks Jeff. Honestly, that means a lot coming from you.

[orly57]

Originally Posted by Baseball Rarities

Orlando - the "Weiser Wonder" postcard that you reference was actually issued in 1910. The original real photo postcard (without title) that is pictured below was issued in 1907, before he was known by that nickname.

I looked for yours in google, but couldn't find it.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Hi Corey! I have the 1872 Wright and Gould trade card of Philadelphia. That was the composite I was referring to.

Thanks. That though is the one I am aware of. What then is the second 1872 team card of Anson referred to?

[oldjudge]

Not sure, but would not be surprised if they are one and the same.

[Baseball Rarities]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Thanks. That though is the one I am aware of. What then is the second 1872 team card of Anson referred to?

They are the same “card.” In Lipset’s collection forever before he sold it.

[shagrotn77]

Has anyone been able to pinpoint a date of release for the Rabbit Maranville Boston Daily American Postcard? It was thought to be from 1912 for a while, but I've seen some people say 1914 is more likely.

[Baseball Rarities]

Originally Posted by shagrotn77

Has anyone been able to pinpoint a date of release for the Rabbit Maranville Boston Daily American Postcard? It was thought to be from 1912 for a while, but I've seen some people say 1914 is more likely.

I think that that Maranville postcard is from a one card set that was probably issued in 1914. Obviously, it is a very rare postcard and I have never seen one that has been postmarked. Upon first glance, the 1912 Boston American Souvenir postcards have a similar look to the Maranville, but they actually have completely different layouts as far as the type is concerned. Also, Maranville did not play for the Braves until September of 1912. Plus, the 1912 set only included Red Sox players and were probably issued to commemorate their 1912 championship team. It would make sense that the Maranville card was instead created after the 1914 season to celebrate the Braves’ World Series victory.

[Jim65]

Tom Seaver (1967 Topps)

Seaver's true rookie card is the 1967 Team Issued Postcard, which was released before Topps last series in 1967

[shagrotn77]

Originally Posted by Baseball Rarities

I think that that Maranville postcard is from a one card set that was probably issued in 1914. Obviously, it is a very rare postcard and I have never seen one that has been postmarked. Upon first glance, the 1912 Boston American Souvenir postcards have a similar look to the Maranville, but they actually have completely different layouts as far as the type is concerned. Also, Maranville did not play for the Braves until September of 1912. Plus, the 1912 set only included Red Sox players and were probably issued to commemorate their 1912 championship team. It would make sense that the Maranville card was instead created after the 1914 season to celebrate the Braves’ World Series victory.

That all makes sense to me. Thank you, Kevin.

[darwinbulldog]

I'd say Speaker's rookie card is E254. I believe all of his other appearances on 1909-1911 issues have been confirmed to be from 1910 or later.

[h2oya311]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

I've never seen the 1869 Notre Dame Cdv, nor for that matter ever heard of it. Does anybody have an image?

Is the 1872 Cdv/Trade Card the same image as the 1872 Philadelphia Composite Cabinet? I've seen the Trade Card. If it is not the same image, does anybody have an image of the 1872 Philadelphia composite?

There is an 1874 Philadelphia cabinet, as well as 1876 and 1878 Chicago cabinets.

I believe the image of the 1869 Notre Dame CDV was on the following website, which now appears to be dead:

https://capanson.com/index.html

Anyone know how to retrieve old information/photos off defunct websites? Anyone know the previous host/owner of that website?

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by h2oya311

I believe the image of the 1869 Notre Dame CDV was on the following website, which now appears to be dead:

https://capanson.com/index.html

Anyone know how to retrieve old information/photos off defunct websites? Anyone know the previous host/owner of that website?

Thanks for trying to locate it Derek. I'm very curious to see it.

[bcbgcbrcb]

I just made a couple of updates to my original posted list today. Individuals updated were Ty Cobb and Josh Gibson.

[Bicem]

You could remove the 07-09 date range for those Cobb postcards, I know you were referring to the Dietsche range but only the 1907 version would anyone consider his rookie.

[Dewey]

Originally Posted by h2oya311

Anyone know how to retrieve old information/photos off defunct websites? Anyone know the previous host/owner of that website?

Archive.org wayback machine. No 1869 photo though. Link below has some cool pics though.

https://web.archive.org/web/20080517...all_cards.html

[h2oya311]

Originally Posted by Dewey

Archive.org wayback machine. No 1869 photo though. Link below has some cool pics though.

https://web.archive.org/web/20080517...all_cards.html

Very cool! Sad to see that the Notre Dame CDV wasn’t on there. Just remembered that I had asked some questions before about Anson a few years back. Here’s an old thread. Looks like Brad W. (a member) was the owner of that site:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=208367

I reached out to him to see if he knows of the Notre Dame CDV I have listed.

[jerrys]

Mark Lewis introduced the idea of collecting the first year card of players in his CPU Card Prices Update magazine in 1979-1980. The idea flourished. There was no stipulation as to size, shape or material of a rookie card; or whether the card should be a solo picture of a player or to picture him surrounded by team mates.

My Rookie card: The first publication of a card with a picture of an unaccompanied player.

Branch Rickey: 1906 SL postcard (accepted) as his rookie card.

1906.jpg

But Rickey's first card is the 1907 W600. None are known to exist. But it is "his" rookie card - there is no substitute.



Note: The Rose Company commenced distribution of all its first run postcards - 12 players from each of 16 teams - in August, 1908. Subsequent postcards were published of different players and backup postcards of players from the first run. All these later produced postcards were printed with only the player's names - no associated team was added - no team postcards.

[dougscats]

I understand that Phil is no longer involved in his research.

So, Derek, as you've offered,
can you post us an update on the RC's of newly-inducted hall-of-famers, from where Phil's list leaves off?

I, and others, I believe, would appreciate it; thanks.

[h2oya311]

Hi Doug -

I'll jump on this very soon...I have information on each HOFer as well as some updates to Phil's incredible work. But I struggle with the consensus definition of a "rookie" and of a "card" (since there is no consensus). To get around this, I was thinking of modifying the table to include multiple cards/photos to ensure that nothing is missed and folks can form their own opinion about what qualifies or does not. Since I have stored images of most of these cards as well, I was tinkering with the idea of adding a list and photo of each known "rookie" / "pre-rookie" item to my imageevent webpage. This might be the best course of action, but will require a bit of time to complete. I've been doing the leg-work for years, but just haven't put it all together in one place.

I'll spend some time over the next week or two to see if I can get something up-and-running for all to enjoy.

[Baseball Rarities]

Originally Posted by h2oya311

I'll jump on this very soon...I have information on each HOFer as well as some updates to Phil's incredible work. But I struggle with the consensus definition of a "rookie" and of a "card" (since there is no consensus). To get around this, I was thinking of modifying the table to include multiple cards/photos to ensure that nothing is missed and folks can form their own opinion about what qualifies or does not.

Totally agree with your take. I cannot wait to see it all.