Rookie Cards of Baseball Hall of Famers

[ledsters]

Winfield has a Team Issue item from Dean's Photo Service in 1973.

[IMG][/IMG]

[CharleyBrown]

I believe the Dean's issue would be considered a photo instead of a card? Phil has a great site about the earliest collectibles, and he does have the Dean's issue listed already.

Phil, what was the second card (not collectible) of John McGraw (and Cy Young)

[novakjr]

I'd question the use of the '72 Puerto Rican League sticker for Schmidt. For one, it's a sticker. For two, he's in a PR league uniform..

I'd also question the use of the '73-80 TCMA ATG Postcards for Weiss and MacPhail. Well, maybe not completely for MacPhail. But considering MacPhail was a Series 6 guy('80 maybe?), I'd go out on a limb on the possibility that the Dexter Press may predate it, or at the very least in the same year.. Weiss was series 5. I'd probably go out on the same limb on the possibility that the '76 Shakey's predates it... Again, I'm not all that familiar with the exact release years of the series.

I'd maybe also put some thought into maybe bypassing anything with 1 known example. Mostly because there is really not enough known about them to ascertain their exact origins as possibly prototypes of unreleased issues. Also, they're completely unattainable.

[CharleyBrown]

David makes a good point about those with only one known example..

Maybe instead of bypassing them, you could keep the 1 known example issues with an asterisk, and then also include the next known sports card?

[CharleyBrown]

BTW Phil,

Thanks for compiling this list!!

[ledsters]

I believe the Dean's issue would be considered a photo instead of a card? Phil has a great site about the earliest collectibles, and he does have the Dean's issue listed already.

The 1973 Issue was given away the same way the 1978 Family Fun Center card of Ozzie Smith was at the stadium...so maybe you can't consider that Ozzie card his rookie (although I believe it is). Just because the 1973 Winfield card does not have stats or writing on the back, does not make it not a card. It is just a larger card on thin paper stock. There are plenty of blank-backed, thin paper-stock cards out there. I would consider the 1973 Winfield his true rookie card...but that is just my opinion.

[ls7plus]

As we've discussed before, there is significant evidence to indicate that the W560 issue was actually released in years subsequent to 1927, that evidence being its inlikely player selection if 1927 had truly been the year of issue. That would leave true rookies of Grove and Foxx to the '26-'29 Exhbits sets, or at least put the latter on a probable par with the former. With the exact date of issue unascertainable for some cards, which is to be deemed "the" rookie may well lie in the eye of the beholder = owner, in this instance.

Good, thought-provoking thread!

Happy collecting as always,

Larry

[bcbgcbrcb]

Good questions, guys.

I am well aware of the Dean's Winfield but have chosen to not include it as the majority of collectors would not consider it a card although it is definitely a Rookie piece. I have basically done the same thing with all team issued photo packs, etc. if you check a lot of the 1940's Rookie Cards, you will see that.

After the 1-of-a-kind cards, the second McGraw card would be his 1902 W600 and the second Young card would be his 1902 W600.

Regarding the Puerto Rican Schmidt, since it was Winter League (not Minor League) and after his Major League debut, I included it as I have done with many Negro League players on the list. The MacPhail and Weiss cards could go either way, it's tough to say so I am going to leave those choices up to the individual collector.

I did include the Family Fun Ozzie as it has just about all the attributes of a card as compared to the Dean's Winfield photo.

The W560 question is a good one, if a corrected date can be pinpointed, I would go back and revise those necessary entries on the list. Keep in mind, that I have researched the Postcard-Back Exhibits and many could not have been issued earlier than 1928 or 1929 based on the uniform styles pictured.

This evening, I will go back and list second cards for those Rookie Cards which have a single unique example known.

Once again, I appreciate all of the input!

[DanP]

Originally Posted by ledsters

Winfield has a Team Issue item from Dean's Photo Service in 1973.

I have this photo of Winfield. It is definitely not a card. IMHO

Dan

[DanP]

Phil, great list. After a quick review I think it is very close to what I have listed.

Jesse Burkett - there is only one Just So and it is altered. Normally I would consider it his RC, but since there's not even one legitimate copy out there (according to what appears your definition), I would consider the W600 or Ramly his RC.

I would consider most E107's over the W600 as RC's. Although personally I'd prefer to consider the W600's RC (only because they are cheaper and more obtainable) in reality for most of the W600's (?) they were distributed from 1902-11. At least with the E107's you know what year they were produced. For all you know the W600 you have could have been produced in 1911 (many years after the E107).
I know there are a few that you could pin down exactly what year they were produced. For any that could be proven to be distributed prior to the E107 I would be OK considering their cards a players RC.

I really believe you would be the only collector to consider stickers as acceptable rookie cards (Gossage/Schmidt). Aren't stickers, you know, stickers?

I thought I read somewhere that the Rose Co Postcards were not produced in 1908? I'll have to check that out.

I comment more later when I get more time.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Thanks, Dan.

Later today, I am going to add the W600 of Burkett next to the Just So. Although the original card was severely trimmed and then rebacked by a collector, the core of the original card still remains so I am going to keep it on my list.

Regrading the E107's and W600's, exactly as you said, I am only listing W600's as Rookie Cards over E107's if a definitive 1902 issue date for that player has been determined. Otherwise, I have gone with the E107.

According to Kevin Struss, who has done extensive research of the Rose Company postcards as well as the Novelty Cutlery postcards, some Roses were issued in 1908 as well as 1909 so those issue dates are believed to be correct.

On the Puerto Rican League stickers, since they are about the same size as standard cards and have player bios on the back, I have chosen to include them. Out of curiosity one time, I tried to peel the "sticker" from the backing and found it impossible to do without harming the piece. I know that an album was issued in 1972 and some were peeled and stuck in there, which probably worked when the glue was fresh.

[Leon]

Hey Phil
That is a great list you put out. You have done a nice job of giving justification to each decision too. That being said, if I were still a rookie card collector, and there were unique rookie cards of some players, I would still count them. It's sort of like saying you completed T206 .....but don't have Wags as he costs too much. If there is a at least "one" of a card, imo, it has to be counted. Now, you could do a caveat and accept the 2nd card, but it would have to have the dreaded asterisk imo..And lastly, I am quite sure there is no absolute definition of what a baseball card is so, if I were doing the list, I would be rather lenient on obscure card-like issues. Some photos can almost be both a card and a photo. Kind of like a photo-card. I have quite a few in my collection as type cards. Good thread!!

[bcbgcbrcb]

Thanks, Leon.

That's exactly what I am going to do later today. I am going to add second cards for those players with uniquely-known Rookie Card examples and clearly identify them as such, leaving it up to the collector's choice, but at least they know where they stand.

The photo-type cards are certainly a gray area and I will have to consider them on a case-by-case basis.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Thanks, Leon.

The photo-type cards are certainly a gray area and I will have to consider them on a case-by-case basis.

There is a cabinet of Anson from 1874 that depicts him on the Philadelphia club, his second professional team. Unlike a lot of other studio cabinets, this one was from a team photo shoot, as the entire team is depicted in individual cabinets. I think that is a better choice for Anson's rookie card then the Buchner Gold Coin, which besides being issued late in his career, depicts an image more generic in nature than an actual depiction of Anson.

EDITED to add that while there is one known copy of the Anson card, some of the other cards from the "set" have more than one known copy. The Anson image is well known, being depicted on a popular composite woodcut of the 1874 Philadephia team.