|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
1949 Pee Wee Reese (Palm Beach)
Wonderful uniform on so many levels. Has been a long time in the works. I even managed to pick up the photo of Reese holding a thermometer and smiling in his cool "Palm Beach" while Bruce Edwards sweats in his flannel.
Dave Grob davegrob1@aol.com |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Leon Luckey |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
1949 Reese Palm Beach
Thanks Leon. This is an extremely rare and significant uniform for any number of reasons. First, it is an extremely rare style and the only surviving example of a Brooklyn Dodgers “Palm Beach” style uniform that I have any record of and it is one of a very few that I know to have been produced for the Dodgers, Indians, and Athletics between 1949-1950. Additionally it is the earliest home Pee Wee Reese Brooklyn Dodgers jersey that I have any record of. 1949 was also an exceptional year for Pee Wee Reese as he led the major leagues with 742 plate appearances and the National League in runs scored with 132 (Reese remains today the Dodgers All Time Leader in Runs Scored). Additional 1949 saw Reese achieve career highs in home runs (16) and fielding percentage (.977).
Reese, unlike many of his team mates, performed extremely well in the 1949 World Series batting .316 (Robinson .188; Campanella .267; Snider .143; Furrilo .125, and Hodges .235). Of note related to the World Series is the fact is that Pee Wee Reese is the ONLY player on either team to have appeared in every game of every Dodger-Yankee World Series of 1941, 1947, 1949, 1952, 1953, 1955, and 1956. Finally, it was in 1949 that Pee Wee Reese was named captain of the Brooklyn Dodgers (See Roscoe McGowen, The Sporting News, 19 December 1956; “Pee Wee…The Pride of Flatbush”). Dave Grob |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
My goodness, Dave...
What a score! Insanely rare style, and a very early example HOF Player no-less. Beautiful and classic style, iconic franchise, and apparently great condition to boot. You really hit the jackpot with that one. So many questions arise from this terrific find (and the photo...) 1. Is there any record of specifically who/how many players on the roster were issued the "Palm Beach" Uniforms? 2. Were the pants also "Palm Beach style", or were only the jerseys this lighter-weight style? 3. Were the players given a choice of Palm Beach vs. traditional Flannel? 4. Or did management simply decide for them? 5. If these were indeed superior in hot weather, why were they so short-lived? Why did the Dodgers and other teams revert back to heavy flannel? 6. Were there any "issues" with the lightweight material that contributed to their demise? Was it perhaps less durable? It's hard to imagine teams today using different style jerseys for different players. I know that certain alterations are common (shortened sleeves, shortened tails, tapered widths, etc.) But seems like having two completely different materials is a phenomenon that would never happen today. Congrats on the fabulous acquisition! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Picked this up a few days ago. 1909 Tigers Team postcard. There are several different versions of the 1909 Tiger postcards that are out there. This is one of the harder to find versions. PSA has only graded 2, with any luck this one will be number 3.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Mark,
Thanks. I’ll take a shot at answering your questions as best I can: 1. Is there any record of specifically who/how many players on the roster were issued the "Palm Beach" Uniforms? A: I don’t know of any formal inventory records of any manufacturer from ant team of this period. I do know that a pretty detailed photographic study and as well as contemporary information for the Dodgers, Indians, and A’s of this period indicates these were not ordered for all players. I suspect much of this was based on a player request. 2. Were the pants also "Palm Beach style", or were only the jerseys this lighter-weight style? A: I don’t believe so based on images and not sure this would have been a practical fabric for pants. 3. Were the players given a choice of Palm Beach vs. traditional Flannel? 4. Or did management simply decide for them? A: I would say player choice. 5. If these were indeed superior in hot weather, why were they so short-lived? Why did the Dodgers and other teams revert back to heavy flannel? 6. Were there any "issues" with the lightweight material that contributed to their demise? Was it perhaps less durable? A: I am not so sure they were superior. First of all, in my comparative study, these “Palm Beach” uniforms are slightly heavier than the flannel fabric of the day. By 1949, fabric weight had gone from 8oz to 6oz with the introduction of synthetic fabrics. By the early 1950s, Wilson was already putting out garments in 4 1/2oz fabric and Rawlings in 1954 introduced a fabric that was 5.71oz made of a blend of Dacron and wool. I suspect they were short lived based on cost and they really were probably not that much cooler. Dave Grob |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
August Pickups | pherbener | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 113 | 09-01-2017 09:39 AM |
August Pickups | HOF Auto Rookies | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 255 | 09-01-2014 05:45 AM |
August Pickups | parker1b2 | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 91 | 08-29-2014 10:15 PM |
AUGUST pickups | tazdmb | Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports | 48 | 08-30-2013 03:16 PM |