rats, I disagree re 1984 Donruss. The product was much better on one critical front: design. I am no fan of the post-1980 issues by any means but there are some beautiful cards in that set. The graphics were elegant and well integrated into the design and there were some really dandy photos, especially action shots. It was really a quantum leap above the prior Donruss offerings and the Fleer and Topps cards, which tended to have blocky design elements that broke up the card rather than bringing it together.

http://www.vintagecardprices.com/pics/1933/127601.jpg
http://www.vintagecardprices.com/pics/1933/127561.jpg
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/$T2eC16J,!)!..._id=89040003C1

Now, as for the OP question about significant cards 1945-1980, at this point, I'd say these are the big dogs:

1948/49 Leaf Robinson, Paige
1949 Bowman Robinson
1951 Mays
1952 Mays
1952 Topps Mathews
1954 Topps Aaron
1954 Bowman Williams
1955 Topps Clemente, Koufax

Lots of other great cards that are maybe a rung below these.

I base my assessment on how lower end raw versions are doing. I've been watching most of these cards over the last several years as I downgraded my collection and adding these cards at a reasonable price has been challenging. I had hoped to snag a vg-ish 1954 Aaron with nice eye appeal and have watched prices on them rise by about 50%; I finally pulled the trigger on a very appealing PSA 3 yesterday at a price point about 25% more than I had hoped, but I had some good card sales last week and had the extra scratch to do it.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder of course, but I always hated the 1984 Donruss set and especially its design, although its horrible pigmentation of many player's skin was another reason. Donruss really turned it around in 1982 after its initial debacle, then told its design team to take a year off in '83-- it would just basically recycle the successful '82 look. I swear the designers took off in 1984 as well, and the panicked CEO asked his wife to come up with something, leading to: "Look honey, I made a swoosh". IMMHO, 1984 gave us the most overrated set of the decade--Donruss, and the most underrated--Fleer.

As for the OP's query, I generally add my own twist, elst I think we just see people grabbing for price guides and naming rookies. I would list 5 cards I would take any day if: 1) I didn't have to pay, and 2) I could never sell. Leaving out Mantle per OP's request, I would take:

1. 1953 Bowman Musial-- my favorite post-war card
2. 1954 Wilson Franks Ted Williams-- love that schwing
3. 1952 Topps Mays-- just oozes cool
4. 1949 Leaf Paige-- infancy of a new card era and a new color of ballplayer
5. 1967 Brooks Robinson-- clean card, nice photo, high-number from my youth

I understand nobody turns down an Aaron, Banks, Kaline, Koufax, and Clemente rookie, but I would really like to have the ones I listed, especially if nice near-mint shape.

I was actually referencing Russ' comments regarding '89 Upper Deck. I really liked that set and the finished look. I think that set ushered in the era of the shiny stuff.

As for my top cards in terms of significance - here it is:

1948 Leaf Robinson
1951 Bowman Mantle
1954 Topps Aaron
1954 Bowman Williams
1955 Topps Clemente, Koufax

-Z

It's right there in the title of the thread--Most significant or sought after postwar cards (besides Mantle)--yet people keep including Mantle. What's with this complete obsession with Mickey Mantle????!!!!!!! This site should be retitled the All Mantle, All the Time forum. Come on!!!!!!

mantle, mantle, mantle!

(in my best jan brady voice)

Haha!! Nice!!!!

What is 1948 Leaf?

1948 Leaf Paige
1949 Bowman Duke Snider
1955 Topps Koufax
1963 Topps Pete Rose
1967 Topps Tom Seaver

'48/49 Leaf Robinson
 

Here it is (not mine):

That is a 1949 Leaf. I own one. It is dated 1949 and describes his 1948 season where he hit .296 and drove in 85 runs. So, I'll ask again, what is a 1948 Leaf?

I believe the 1948 Leaf and 1949 Leaf are identical on the front..........just different on the back.

1948 Leaf is what they were called for a very long time, and some of the cards have a 1948 copyright on the back. However, the hobby, sometimes resistant to change, has since come to some general conclusion that in fact they were issued in 1949. Much of this due the fact that some old-time collectors remember buying them in packs in 1949 - Ted Z, for instance. When I scooped up a few in the Sixties they were definitely thought of, at least among the crowd I collected with in L.A., as 1948. My 2007 Standard Catalog lists them as 1949. I now call them 1949, but I sometimes catch myself thinking 1948; old habits die hard.

Thanks for the clarity. I see graded versions in holders listed as both 1948 and 1949 and assumed they were issued in 2 different years.

Here is 2 cards i have that are 48/49 LEAFS:
Those the copyright says 49 on them.
A fellow board member wrote a article on OldCardboard discussing this in lengthy detail: http://www.oldcardboard.com/ref/BBC-...ail.asp?id=796
And here is the NET 54 ARCHIVED THREAD: http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...1948+1949+Leaf

[IMG]http://www.cleansweepauctions.com/im...ate14con38.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i1240.photobucket.com/albums/...ps22a6113a.jpg[/IMG]

Everything points to them being 1949. I suppose it took years for people to understand the world is not flat, TPG be damned.

for me
bowman rcs of spahn and musial
48 paige
48 robinson

1957 Topps Dodgers Sluggers
1956 Topps Dodgers and Yankees team cards
1953 Topps Jackie Robinson
1953 Topps Mays
1952 Topps Campanella

Am going to put it out there that I think of "The Greatest Generation" of baseball players as the black superstars who entered the game between 1947 and the early 60s. They utterly transformed the game if not our entire country and did so while enduring unbelievable hardship and ugliness (the book "After Jackie" is a great source). Along those lines, I am putting my votes down for--

1. 1949 Leaf Jackie Robinson
2. 1954 Topps Hank Aaron
3. 1951 Bowman Willie Mays
4. 1954 Topps Ernie Banks
5. 1957 Topps Frank Robinson

Obviously the list could be much much longer.