Just to be clear - I opined that the card was not Van Haltren, and that if it was a ballplayer, it was very likely an obscure one. I checked through a bunch of 1887-1888 team photos and did not see anyone that was a good candidate for the card guy. Then I let it go.

Pete Nash subsequently sent me an email with a scan of a player from the 1886 Chi team photo. He said he thought this may be the guy. I agreed. I found a pretty good example in the 1984 SABR publication and was able to create a slightly more detailed scan. After looking at that in detail, I was nearly 100% convinced.

Thanks Patrick. Hope you are doing well. Bruce talked about the card often, as it was probably his favorite piece. But he never once mentioned that he knew it wasn't Van Haltren, and it never crossed my mind to question it. And you are right that he didn't care. I think the grade and its value were what most interested him. It was a type card so the player didn't matter. This is all new to me.

A Guess
 

Edited due to lack of knowledge

Bob-let me say what Mark will probably think when he reads this. This will be the dumbest response in the thread. LOL

Yeah, considering that Paddy Baumann was about 2 years old when the card came out, it seems unlikely...:rolleyes:.

Cheers,
Blair

I guess I missed my chance.

So I didn't read the entire thread, So I'll ask. Mark is the person pictured Joe Jackson or not?

John - if you're talking about my avatar - the guys at Heritage sure thought so.