REA -- What Did you Get?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

LOL you'd fit right in on the BST.

LOL but au contraire, I have bought quite a few cards from Board members, and none were discounted by any means. In REA though the cards seem to go into orbit.

[t206kid]

just a couple 1s

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

LOL but au contraire, I have bought quite a few cards from Board members, and none were discounted by any means. In REA though the cards seem to go into orbit.

Of course it depends on what you want, but as someone who just bargain hunts for resale I loved the two lots I won.

[bobfreedman]

Of things

[Peter_Spaeth]

Great Bazooka Mantle. I have seen only one other one that had the tab although I am sure there are others. Speaking of the tab, I wonder why it says the complete set is 9 players when it's something like 23?

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Great Bazooka Mantle. I have seen only one other one that had the tab although I am sure there are others. Speaking of the tab, I wonder why it says the complete set is 9 players when it's something like 23?

I have had my eye on these for a long time. I have been an under bidder in the past. I am aware of 3 other 1959 complete boxes with Mantle - could there be another 1 or 2 or 3 - maybe. Regarding the "9 players". Bazooka first issued the set with just 9 Superstar players. Not sure why (presumably because it sold well) they later added 14 more - These are the super tough short prints.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by hcv123

I have had my eye on these for a long time. I have been an under bidder in the past. I am aware of 3 other 1959 complete boxes with Mantle - could there be another 1 or 2 or 3 - maybe. Regarding the "9 players". Bazooka first issued the set with just 9 Superstar players. Not sure why (presumably because it sold well) they later added 14 more - These are the super tough short prints.

Ah, I get it, thanks. One of my favorite cards in the world, and in the scheme of things they cost very little.

[griffon512]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

LOL but au contraire, I have bought quite a few cards from Board members, and none were discounted by any means. In REA though the cards seem to go into orbit.

I can confirm that Peter is a very reasonable buyer on the BST board and will pay strong if the card warrants it. However, using a Spaceballs analogy, he will not go up to "ludicrous speed!" I can not say the same for whoever spent $50k more on a Mantle Dice Game card than a decent Ruth rookie, but maybe I just don't get it.

[ruth_rookie]

my wife wishes to thank to everyone who outbid me...

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by griffon512

I can confirm that Peter is a very reasonable buyer on the BST board and will pay strong if the card warrants it. However, using a Spaceballs analogy, he will not go up to "ludicrous speed!" I can not say the same for whoever spent $50k more on a Mantle Dice Game card than a decent Ruth rookie, but maybe I just don't get it.

+1 Jimbo!

[CobbSpikedMe]

Some very nice items on the board here guys! Wow. I really liked several cards like the blank back Wagners that started the thread and the Mantle Bazooka complete box. Was that a Magie error I saw too? Nice.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by griffon512

I can confirm that Peter is a very reasonable buyer on the BST board and will pay strong if the card warrants it. However, using a Spaceballs analogy, he will not go up to "ludicrous speed!" I can not say the same for whoever spent $50k more on a Mantle Dice Game card than a decent Ruth rookie, but maybe I just don't get it.

Thanks James -- who btw is a real pleasure to deal with and has great taste in cards.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by griffon512

I can confirm that Peter is a very reasonable buyer on the BST board and will pay strong if the card warrants it. However, using a Spaceballs analogy, he will not go up to "ludicrous speed!" I can not say the same for whoever spent $50k more on a Mantle Dice Game card than a decent Ruth rookie, but maybe I just don't get it.

Hundreds of Ruth rookies (with different backs, of course), and ONE Topps Dice Game Mantle graded. And Mantle has been keeping close company with Ruth, a phenomena which those of us who also study sabermetric analysis (primarily under Professor Bill James, though not excluding other authors) will not disagree with.

Highest regards,

Larry

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Hundreds of Ruth rookies (with different backs, of course), and ONE Topps Dice Game Mantle graded. And Mantle has been keeping close company with Ruth, a phenomena which those of us who also study sabermetric analysis (primarily under Professor Bill James, though not excluding other authors) will not disagree with.

Highest regards,

Larry

I don’t think there are hundreds of Ruth’s rookies. 71 graded by PSA and 41 graded by SGC. There are probably as much if not more resubmission than there are raw. Not exactly hundreds. There are 1235 52 Topps mantles graded by PSA alone, which is 10x the amount of total graded Ruth rookies (all backs).

[CW]

Wow, super nice proof, Michael. I didn't even see that one in the auction.

[tlwise12]

I won the 1923-24 Thomas Gutierrez album and could not be happier! These usually got for quite a bit more. Condition is not the best, but who really cares when you have something this awesome.

[oldjudge]

Great pick up Travis. Congratulations!

[aljurgela]

Originally Posted by tlwise12

I won the 1923-24 Thomas Gutierrez album and could not be happier! These usually got for quite a bit more. Condition is not the best, but who really cares when you have something this awesome.

Well done Travis! Well Done! I think that you will love that when it is in hand!

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Hundreds of Ruth rookies (with different backs, of course), and ONE Topps Dice Game Mantle graded. And Mantle has been keeping close company with Ruth, a phenomena which those of us who also study sabermetric analysis (primarily under Professor Bill James, though not excluding other authors) will not disagree with.

Highest regards,

Larry

Larry-Time to recount. If you ignore Sporting News ad backs(they are not broken out from blank backs), there have been 35 Ruth rookies graded, across all ad backs.

[robertsmithnocure]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Larry-Time to recount. If you ignore Sporting News ad backs(they are not broken out from blank backs), there have been 35 Ruth rookies graded, across all ad backs.

oldjudge - Can you explain a little more? I know that the Sporting Life backs only come in the latter M101-4 series, but do you only consider the blank back Ruths rookie cards, or are there other backs?

The peculiarities of the different backs is very confusing to me.

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by robertsmithnocure

oldjudge - Can you explain a little more? I know that the Sporting Life backs only come in the latter M101-4 series, but do you only consider the blank back Ruths rookie cards, or are there other backs?

The peculiarities of the different backs is very confusing to me.

FYI, while the timing of their release during the 1916 Calendar Year varies and remains somewhat ambiguous, all 1916 Ruth cards (blank or ad back) are considered his rookie card. Also, many collectors believe the M101-5 related issues (e.g., Famous & Barr/M101-5 blank backs) to be among the earliest released issues. A moot point because a “Rookie card” designation is typically ANY cardboard issue released during the entire calendar year (not predicated on which month during the year the card was issued).

[Rhotchkiss]

Michael, seems the Board is happy with your decision to ignore my advice to pick up that Magie error SGC 30, instead of the proof. So if you cant beat'em, join'em. Great proof!! I guess I gotta get me a proof one of these days.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I understand Larry's point about relative scarcity, but to me even if it's 100 or more a Ruth rookie card is still a much bigger deal than a 1/1 60s Mantle issue. Mantle -- great player, all the more so because of the perfect storm that made him an icon. But Ruth is on another level, and it's prewar. It's all a subjective judgment though.

[robertsmithnocure]

Originally Posted by Vintageclout

FYI, while the timing of their release during the 1916 Calendar Year varies and remains somewhat ambiguous, all 1916 Ruth cards (blank or ad back) are considered his rookie card. Also, many collectors believe the M101-5 related issues (e.g., Famous & Barr/M101-5 blank backs) to be among the earliest released issues. A moot point because a “Rookie card” designation is typically ANY cardboard issue released during the entire calendar year (not predicated on which month during the year the card was issued).

Vintageclout - Thanks for that info. All things being equal though, I would prefer to have the M101-5 version of Ruth over the M101-4 just for the simple fact that it was produced earlier in the year. I understand that they may both be considered his "Rookie card," but I would still prefer to have the earlier one, especially because they seem to be more scarce.

So, besides the blank back, Famous & Barr and Standard Biscuit versions, are there any other Ruths that are generally considered to be from the earlier "M101-5" series?

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

LOL but au contraire, I have bought quite a few cards from Board members, and none were discounted by any means. In REA though the cards seem to go into orbit.

+1 there, Pete. I was the under-bidder on the '54-56 PSA 9 Spic & Span Aaron, at $8400 (it went for $9k with the BP) and was amazed. One of the 3 9's went for $3600 with BP at a Heritage auction less than one week earlier (probably the worst of the 3, though, with the ink too dark) and one changed hands on ebay for quite likely in the $6K range just a day or so before REA ended (opening bid: $7,000; auction didn't go forward because card "no longer available," so I'm guessing $6K and change).

May we fare better in the future and highest regards,

Larry