Any player cards you dont collect because of morals

[1952boyntoncollector]

I know I will never collect OJ Simpson

i note there are a bunch of guys in the the 50s sets that did not have nice things to say about jackie robinson and willie mays as well..

[bnorth]

The only player I will not collect is Tony Gwynn and I will admit my reason is beyond silly.

I am so anti Tony Gwynn that when a great hobby friend was excited and sent me a picture of his new game used Tony Gwynn bat. My return email only said "if you ever bring him up again we can't be friends". He has never sent me a email about getting another Tony Gwynn item.

[scmavl]

Cap Anson. And it's a bummer, because his Goodwin Champions is one of the most beautiful cards ever produced.

[Belfast1933]

Interesting topic...

My family does not love the fact that I have an N28 Cap Anson - not a good dude as it relates to integrating the game.

Here's a tangent issue - anyone ever have an issue selling to or buying from another collector or dealer with very different political slants than your own?

(I admit... I have)

[Mike D.]

I've owned Pete Rose cards, but have never looked to acquire them. I usually sell them off as soon as possible.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't have a character screen.

[G1911]

None. Vintage is history, and history is not the study of things I like or people who share my life philosophy and values. My non-sports sets include mass murders like Alexander, Caesar, and the more modern ones that offend. OJ Simpson is in my 70’s football sets. Charlie Haeger is in my 2006 Bowman box. My boxing sets include Kid McCoy who murdered his girlfriend and Billy Papke who murdered his wife. If I had the wallet to chase Old Judge’s, I would have Anson in my set. He sits in many of my modern sets. I’m sure one can find dozens of players to object too in any set.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

Here's a tangent issue - anyone ever have an issue selling to or buying from another collector or dealer with very different political slants than your own?

(I admit... I have)

I cannot imagine living in a world where I refuse to deal with someone because they disagree with me. I don’t care if a person I am dealing with is a hardline conservative or a communist. I know good men and bad of every political stripe.

[Casey2296]

I don't collect Bonds, I do collect Cobb.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I cannot imagine living in a world where I refuse to deal with someone because they disagree with me. I don’t care if a person I am dealing with is a hardline conservative or a communist. I know good men and bad of every political stripe.

I would never refuse to deal with someone based on their views alone.

[CardPadre]

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by CardPadre

Ha! Classic.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by CardPadre

Love it lol

[Peter_Spaeth]

i collect historical figures but there I draw some lines -- no Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, or Trump.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

i collect historical figures but there I draw some lines -- no Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, or Trump.

This is where the drama begins.

[jethrod3]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

i collect historical figures but there I draw some lines -- no Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, or Trump.

Same. And I bought the 1956 Topps Adventure set WITHOUT the Max Schmeling card because I like the other boxing cards but have no interest in having a swastika in my collection.

[mrreality68]

I collect players and cards I like. I research the players and enjoy the history and the stories behind the game.
I do not truly not buy/or not buy a player based on their politics, behavior, character, etc.
If We did there are many, many players we would not collect. Each does as they do.

[Rad_Hazard]

I also avoid Anson, but that's about it.

[packs]

I love the Giants but don't collect Lawrence Taylor.

[Belfast1933]

It's always bugged me to hear that John McGraw was said to have carried a small piece of rope from a lynching "for luck"

I first heard this during the Ken Burns baseball series many years ago and I think of it often when looking at his cards (i'm a HOP "as a player" collector so it's not an issue with McGraw)

But still...

[JustinD]

Not a set collector, so I just buy cards I want and like. I guess by definition that makes it easy to pass by players I simply don't like.

I don't really often get concerned about the history or character of the player if I like the card.

I can remember circle-filing a few Denny McLain's simply for being a complete excuse filled d**k as I knew people in the town he helped destroy with his embezzlement scheme. So I guess that's one, as it personally touched me. I never bought one, but if it comes in a lot...it's gone.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

It's always bugged me to hear that John McGraw was said to have carried a small piece of rope from a lynching "for luck"

I first heard this during the Ken Burns baseball series many years ago and I think of it often when looking at his cards (i'm a HOP "as a player" collector so it's not an issue with McGraw)

But still...

McGraw was a weird intense character that tended to rub people the wrong way at times, as well as doing conflicting things. It is horribly odd that this was a perverse tradition at the time and not uncommon. What is weirder is that in a true example of conflicting actions, McGraw did actually try to break the color barrier in 1901 by attempting to sneak in Charles Grant Jr as an American Indian named Chief Tokohama. If it wasn’t for Charles Comiskey putting a stop to it by recognizing Grant, McGraw would have been successful.

As an example that few may know of this sick tradition, feel free to read about Nap Lajoie -

[steve B]

Not really. Although there were card sets I just couldn't get interested in. Like one that was all serial killers. Got the promo pack in a lot and probably still have it somewhere. I can't recall ever seeing the cards offered, so it's possible they didn't end up being issued.

AH the early 90s when there were boatloads of cards about everything.

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by JustinD

McGraw was a weird intense character that tended to rub people the wrong way at times, as well as doing conflicting things. It is horribly odd that this was a perverse tradition at the time and not uncommon. What is weirder is that in a true example of conflicting actions, McGraw did actually try to break the color barrier in 1901 by attempting to sneak in Charles Grant Jr as an American Indian named Chief Tokohama. If it wasn’t for Charles Comiskey putting a stop to it by recognizing Grant, McGraw would have been successful.

As an example that few may know of this sick tradition, feel free to read about Nap Lajoie -

Wow, horrible… almost wish I didn’t know about this. (But thx for sharing - just wish his history wasn’t so tarnished by something like this)

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

Wow, horrible… almost wish I didn’t know about this. (But thx for sharing - just wish his history wasn’t so tarnished by something like this)

I just think it's too hard to judge the past by current standards. What is positive is that those past standards are gone.

The real issue for me is when people do not learn from the mistakes or misguided mores of the past and continue to live by them. When we hide these things or erase them, they are only bound to repeat. We learn, we move forward.

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I just think it's too hard to judge the past by current standards. What is positive is that those past standards are gone.

The real issue for me is when people do not learn from the mistakes or misguided mores of the past and continue to live by them. When we hide these things or erase them, they are only bound to repeat. We learn, we move forward.

I hear you and can see and agree with you to a point... but for me, a lucky lynching rope?? That's as clear as can be, even applying some latitude for a different time. This blows waaay past my own limit.

It's just a bummer to learn these things

[G1911]

Feel free to send me your Anson’s, Lajoie’s, McGraw’s and anyone else who does not meet todays standards of acceptable thought. Free your collection of its burden, and get some cash (note: cash may picture individuals who do not fit your worldview) in exchange!

P.S. Good luck finding 2022 right think in 1910.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

I hear you and can see and agree with you to a point... but for me, a lucky lynching rope?? That's as clear as can be, even applying some latitude for a different time. This blows waaay past my own limit.

It's just a bummer to learn these things

What's truly astonishing is how matter of factly the newspaper reports the murder.

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What's truly astonishing is how matter of factly the newspaper reports the murder.

Yeah that was an intense read.

There is something to be said about those who reform later in life such as Speaker and Cobb. I have a lot of respect for those who can see the err in their ways and ideals, especially at an older age.

[G1911]

I went diving into the story here of this sad incident.

Robertson murdered a policeman on the street on a "forenoon", Deputy Sherriff Phillip Fatch. NY Times Article is here, though I can only read the abstract (https://www.nytimesn7cgmftshazwhfgzm...l-richard.html).

It appears that he was accused of assault, and two policemen came to arrest him. This unsourced marker, clearly and heavily biased to the most charitable view of Robertson possible, (https://www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=202593) claims "When two white deputies arrived to arrest Mr. Robertson, he objected and ultimately fled after an exchange of gunfire left all three wounded." It seems that there is little doubt he murdered a cop and shot another, who appears to have been making a lawful arrest. I can find nothing on if Robertson was guilty or not of the original assault, which is probably lost to time and only the claimed victims really knew, possibly the police if they had provided evidence. Robertson was shot by his victims three times as well. After Fatch succumbed to his wounds, a mob removed him from his cell and "fired several shots" and hung him. I interpret this to mean the poor man was given a coup de grace before being strung up, that's usually what this kind of phrasing meant at that time.

There are efforts for this memorial to Robertson and its final placement, which is apparently a hot topic in Mobile (https://www.al.com/news/2022/07/cont...-happened.html). Advocates of the memorial, which they wanted to place where a statue of the cancelled Raphael Semmes used to stand, claimed they were unaware of the allegation Robertson committed murder, which seems absolutely impossible to credibly believe as the memorial does include that fact, though phrased in the most charitable way.

What a sad and thoroughly unnecessary human tragedy all around, with 2 deaths and another probably seriously wounded person. A lynching is, should be needless too say, a horrible thing, as is the denial of due process rights, especially when the guilty party is already in custody and no longer a meaningful threat to the public. So is committing murder in the first place, Fatch seems to have done nothing wrong here as far as I have read, he served a legitimate warrant for arrest on assault charges, for those charges to be heard in court. As to the modern controversy, I do not think at this point I will ever understand the cancellation of historical figures to be replaced with similar statues, memorials and commemorations of people who are not historical figures and evidently committed objectively horrible crimes, but are more amenable to the narratives of those doing said cancelling. There seem to be many victims in this saga, and no heroes.

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by G1911

I went diving into the story here of this sad incident.

Robertson murdered a policeman on the street on a "forenoon", Deputy Sherriff Phillip Fatch. NY Times Article is here, though I can only read the abstract (https://www.nytimesn7cgmftshazwhfgzm...l-richard.html).

It appears that he was accused of assault, and two policemen came to arrest him. This unsourced marker, clearly and heavily biased to the most charitable view of Robertson possible, (https://www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=202593) claims "When two white deputies arrived to arrest Mr. Robertson, he objected and ultimately fled after an exchange of gunfire left all three wounded." It seems that there is little doubt he murdered a cop and shot another, who appears to have been making a lawful arrest. I can find nothing on if Robertson was guilty or not of the original assault, which is probably lost to time and only the claimed victims really knew, possibly the police if they had provided evidence. Robertson was shot by his victims three times as well. After Fatch succumbed to his wounds, a mob removed him from his cell and "fired several shots" and hung him. I interpret this to mean the poor man was given a coup de grace before being strung up, that's usually what this kind of phrasing meant at that time.

There are efforts for this memorial to Robertson and its final placement, which is apparently a hot topic in Mobile (https://www.al.com/news/2022/07/cont...-happened.html). Advocates of the memorial, which they wanted to place where a statue of the cancelled Raphael Semmes used to stand, claimed they were unaware of the allegation Robertson committed murder, which seems absolutely impossible to credibly believe as the memorial does include that fact, though phrased in the most charitable way.

What a sad and thoroughly unnecessary human tragedy all around, with 2 deaths and another probably seriously wounded person. A lynching is, should be needless too say, a horrible thing, as is the denial of due process rights, especially when the guilty party is already in custody and no longer a meaningful threat to the public. So is committing murder in the first place, Fatch seems to have done nothing wrong here as far as I have read, he served a legitimate warrant for arrest on assault charges, for those charges to be heard in court. As to the modern controversy, I do not think at this point I will ever understand the cancellation of historical figures to be replaced with similar statues, memorials and commemorations of people who are not historical figures and evidently committed objectively horrible crimes, but are more amenable to the narratives of those doing said cancelling. There seem to be many victims in this saga, and no heroes.

Incredibly sad story and thanks for doing the footwork. Regardless of the crimes involved, carrying a piece of lynching rope would only bring bad mojo in my book. I don't really care for Anson and his racist past so I don't collect his cards, but I also collect cards I like that are morally bankrupt in other ways, so I don't really have a leg to stand on.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Rad_Hazard

Incredibly sad story and thanks for doing the footwork. Regardless of the crimes involved, carrying a piece of lynching rope would only bring bad mojo in my book. I don't really care for Anson and his racist past so I don't collect his cards, but I also collect cards I like that are morally bankrupt in other ways, so I don't really have a leg to stand on.

Carrying a piece of lynch rope for luck is, of course, not as bad as actually doing said lynching, but it is such an odd thing to encounter. Rough street justice or perceived justice, racial and not racial, has been a norm for the vast majority of human history, but this little anecdote surprises. An all-around tragedy, the mechanism of it's sad and bloody conclusion turned into a good luck charm. History is often more strange than any fiction.

I do not mean this in a personal or negative way to anyone, but I find it endlessly interesting that today we see and treat racism (Anson's crime of thought, after the fact) as in many ways worse than even murder itself, that most absolute and final of all things (Simpson's crime of action, and a crime when committed). Anson is more objected to than Simpson, a statue of Semmes is pulled down for a memorial to a fellow who apparently committed a homicide without any dispute that he did. It dots our culture in many ways and places, and it surely says something about who we are as a people today, but I am not quite smart enough to put my finger on exactly what that is.

[packs]

The information included in that Lajoie announcement made sure everyone knew who was hung. It went out of its way to tell you who was on the rope. The anecdote could have been about lynching anyone, and this good luck superstition, but it was about lynching a specific type of person.

I don't know that anything can be gleaned about Lajoie from the story though. He might have had this thing thrust on him and been polite about it but personally disturbed. I'm not sure from what's there.

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by G1911

Carrying a piece of lynch rope for luck is, of course, not as bad as actually doing said lynching, but it is such an odd thing to encounter. Rough street justice or perceived justice, racial and not racial, has been a norm for the vast majority of human history, but this little anecdote surprises. An all-around tragedy, the mechanism of it's sad and bloody conclusion turned into a good luck charm. History is often more strange than any fiction.

I do not mean this in a personal or negative way to anyone, but I find it endlessly interesting that today we see and treat racism (Anson's crime of thought, after the fact) as in many ways worse than even murder itself, that most absolute and final of all things (Simpson's crime of action, and a crime when committed). Anson is more objected to than Simpson, a statue of Semmes is pulled down for a memorial to a fellow who apparently committed a homicide without any dispute that he did. It dots our culture in many ways and places, and it surely says something about who we are as a people today, but I am not quite smart enough to put my finger on exactly what that is.

Anson's crimes were not of thought only, but of action. It's referenced at length in regards to Moses Fleetwood Walker and the Chicago Mascot Clarence Duvall in the book "The Summer of Beer and Whiskey" by Edward Achorn.

[Republicaninmass]

Can't imagine collecting Aaron Hernendez cards

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Rad_Hazard

Anson's crimes were not of thought only, but of action. It's referenced at length in regards to Moses Fleetwood Walker and the Chicago Mascot Clarence Duvall in the book "The Summer of Beer and Whiskey" by Edward Achorn.

I don't have a copy of this book, though it's on my long "get it and read it" list. What crime did Anson commit? I am only familiar with his organizing professional white baseball to exclude black players, but I am no expert on Anson.

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by G1911

I don't have a copy of this book, though it's on my long "get it and read it" list. What crime did Anson commit? I am only familiar with his organizing professional white baseball to exclude black players, but I am no expert on Anson.

I was just referencing your "crimes of thought" comment and just said they were crimes of action, not an actual crime, just him being a horrible racist.

The book elaborates on his hatred of minorities and what led him to that ideology and the situation with Walker and how that shaped baseball.

That book is also an audiobook with a great narrator, I highly recommend it. Also 59 in 84 by same author and narrator about Old Hoss Radbourn is also excellent.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Rad_Hazard

I was just referencing your "crimes of thought" comment and just said they were crimes of action, not an actual crime, just him being a horrible racist.

The book elaborates on his hatred of minorities and what led him to that ideology and the situation with Walker and how that shaped baseball.

That book is also an audiobook with a great narrator, I highly recommend it. Also 59 in 84 by same author and narrator about Old Hoss Radbourn is also excellent.

Ah. I mean that Anson's 'crime' is one of the intellect. He never lynched anybody, enslaved a person, or assaulted someone for the color of their skin as far as I am aware. What he did was not a crime at all, was accepted by his society at that time (Anson was not a commissioner or somebody who could simply dictate to a reluctant following), and was Anson refusing to do a thing himself.

59 in 84, I loved, fascinating look at one of the most interesting single player seasons of baseball history.

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by G1911

Ah. I mean that Anson's 'crime' is one of the intellect. He never lynched anybody, enslaved a person, or assaulted someone for the color of their skin as far as I am aware. What he did was not a crime at all, was accepted by his society at that time (Anson was not a commissioner or somebody who could simply dictate to a reluctant following), and was Anson refusing to do a thing himself.

59 in 84, I loved, fascinating look at one of the most interesting single player seasons of baseball history.

You'll love The Summer of Beer and Whiskey then. Chris Von Der Ahe was quite a character.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Rad_Hazard

You'll love The Summer of Beer and Whiskey then. Chris Von Der Ahe was quite a character.

Thank you! Found a like new hardcover online for $5 and just ordered it.

[Cliff Bowman]

I don’t collect too much post 1980 but if I saw a neat Mel Hall Cubs pinback or team issued photo I wouldn’t have any trepidations about buying it.

[BCauley]

This idea has never actually crossed my mind before. For me personally, it wouldn't really matter what their morals were/are as they are not benefiting from me picking up the card.

In regards to the lynching rope, that is truly a bizarre concept and now after I submit this post, will likely go down a long rabbit hole trying to research it. It would be interesting to find out the chain of custody of a rope taken from around a murdered person's neck to being cut up and pieces given to a baseball player.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by jethrod3

Same. And I bought the 1956 Topps Adventure set WITHOUT the Max Schmeling card because I like the other boxing cards but have no interest in having a swastika in my collection.

Fully agree with this. At the National the first booth I went to had a table full of nazi cards. Really off putting, especially since I went with a friend who is Jewish. There are some lines to draw and that’s certainly one for me.

[campyfan39]

Great original post and thought provoking for sure!

Some really sad things on this thread. Certainly a "lucky lynching rope" is putrid. Also foreign to me is the concept of not dealing with a dealer who has different political views from my own. I also find it beyond the pale that Trump was compared with Hitler and Stalin (the later 2 killed millions upon millions of people). Ignorant and unwise hyperbole. An interesting topic gone off the rails with some extremist comments.

To answer OP: I selectively collect players I like but am fine with ones I don't being in sets. For me the other side of that coin is more apparent in my collection: My favorite player is Campanella in part because of his character: overcoming discrimination and staying positive after the accident. Yet I am also aware that he wasn't the best husband to at least one of his wives.

Every human has strong faults and flaws. I try not to cast too many stones because i know my own heart is not always where it should be.

[ALR-bishop]

As a set collector I collect all cards in any set I collect...the good, the bad and the ugly. I guess I could feel a little guitly about buying a fantasy 1959 Ed Bouchee card

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

As a set collector I collect all cards in any set I collect...the good, the bad and the ugly. I guess I could feel a little guitly about buying a fantasy 1959 Ed Bouchee card

I forgot him being an immoral Cub too! It took me forever to get a decent 1962 Canadian Post of his.

[jethrod3]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Fully agree with this. At the National the first booth I went to had a table full of nazi cards. Really off putting, especially since I went with a friend who is Jewish. There are some lines to draw and that’s certainly one for me.

Yup, and that's another reason why I won't collect some old non-sports issues. On a related note, I'll sometimes attend in-person auctions in Indiana and also bid in some auctions from smaller companies online, and it bothers me that many of these auction houses sell Nazi paraphernalia. They sell this crap because obviously some people buy it, but I have considered contacting the owners of these auction houses and asking them why they wish to perpetuate interest in objects associated with nothing buy hate. I've held off from doing so....people have a right to sell what they want as long as it's not illegal. But I may well start personally avoiding the places that include such items in their auctions. I'm sure my business wouldn't be missed in most cases.

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by jethrod3

Yup, and that's another reason why I won't collect some old non-sports issues. On a related note, I'll sometimes attend in-person auctions in Indiana and also bid in some auctions from smaller companies online, and it bothers me that many of these auction houses sell Nazi paraphernalia. They sell this crap because obviously some people buy it, but I have considered contacting the owners of these auction houses and asking them why they wish to perpetuate interest in objects associated with nothing buy hate. I've held off from doing so....people have a right to sell what they want as long as it's not illegal. But I may well start personally avoiding the places that include such items in their auctions. I'm sure my business wouldn't be missed in most cases.

I couldn’t possibly agree more…. Cheers to you for taking a personal stand.

And related, I occasionally see posts of late 1800’s card sets which include incredibly racist caricature images of African American baseball players, etc. I just can’t imagine how there is joy in collecting cards that perpetuate inages like this. Clearly some do, and to each his own, I guess. I just don’t get it

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

I couldn’t possibly agree more…. Cheers to you for taking a personal stand.

And related, I occasionally see posts of late 1800’s card sets which include incredibly racist caricature images of African American baseball players, etc. I just can’t imagine how there is joy in collecting cards that perpetuate inages like this. Clearly some do, and to each his own, I guess. I just don’t get it

Well said

[todeen]

Originally Posted by jethrod3

Yup, and that's another reason why I won't collect some old non-sports issues. On a related note, I'll sometimes attend in-person auctions in Indiana and also bid in some auctions from smaller companies online, and it bothers me that many of these auction houses sell Nazi paraphernalia. They sell this crap because obviously some people buy it, but I have considered contacting the owners of these auction houses and asking them why they wish to perpetuate interest in objects associated with nothing buy hate. I've held off from doing so....people have a right to sell what they want as long as it's not illegal. But I may well start personally avoiding the places that include such items in their auctions. I'm sure my business wouldn't be missed in most cases.

I wanted to buy some Nazi coinage once, and my mother heard about it and gave me a rebuke. I'm a historian, and to me I see a historical artifact. But I passed them up and haven't ever bought any.

I think a similar question to sale of Nazi items is: why are serial killer books and shows so popular? I imagine collecting items of evil and watching items of evil have many similar characteristics.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk