Joe-I think we are talking about two different things. When I talk about a team change I mean a pose that was issued with one team during 1888 and then corrected to show the movement to a new team, also during 1888. That would be two 1888 cards with the same pose and two or more different teams. The examples that you point out are something else. The Hanlon-Boston, as you know, was Hanlon’s only 1888 card. The others have 1888 cards on different teams, but none, as far as I know, is a corrected card. They were just previously unissued 1888 poses that were issued with the new team.

Yep, I was citing cards that don't fit the definition you put forth. Hardie Henderson did have a single pose with two different teams in 1888 (222-3 Brooklyn & Pittsburgh) but that is an exception to the more commonplace occurrence of certain poses with one team and other poses with another team. For that matter, I also have not verified Henderson 222-3 was correctly catalogued:

222-3 White cap, hands at chest

a. Henderson, P., Brooklyn (B-0516)
b. Henderson, P., Pitts ("Pitts" in script) (Fa)
c. H E Hender_on, P., Brooklyn (Fa)

That’s interesting. My old copy of the Cartophilic Society listing only shows (a) and (b) for Henderson pose 3. What listing are you looking at?

I pulled this from a hybrid listing. There were a number of additions to the Cartophilic listing over a couple year window of research as we studied several notable collections (BB HOF, DPL, etc.).

I don’t have that additional variety in my notes, but I’ll check my cards. Otherwise, I’m lost. If it is correct it would be the only known example in the set.

Well, I guess I have lost track of what I have. First, I have the mystery Henderson pose 3 with Brooklyn. Also, I have a team change pose of Harkins. They issued pose 1 with Brooklyn (albeit misidentified as Henderson) and then updated it to Baltimore. It is interesting that each variety has the name at least partially written in. So, that makes two known 1888 team corrections in the set, still pretty rare.

O'Connell never played for Des Moines. In 1888 he only played for Omaha. Why is there a card of him with Des Moines?

Quinn wasn't sold to Boston until August 24, so if he was on an Old Judge card from 1888 with Boston that would suggest that they were issuing changed cards relatively late in the summer.

Coughlin signed with Chicago on May 26, and was gone from the club by July 17.

I suppose I shouldn't expect too much from a card set released more than 130 years ago, but the timing of things seems all over the place.