I agree on these, especially 1 and 2. (as I have copies of both)
For some reason, the T205 Cobby isn't ever on one of these lists, but I think he should be! Because of this (and the fact I own 2 so am hopeful) the upside might be pretty good. That's not the reason I love the card though. It's one of the best looking cards in the hobby, of one of the greatest players ever.

I paid about 15k for this one (around a year and a half ago)...About 2500 more than it sold several months earlier and am still happy to look at it. :)

https://luckeycards.com/t2052.jpg

(Deleted so as not to discuss political crap)

No politics on the forum
 

Please, no political crap....

As for the most iconic prewar card, except maybe the T206 Wags, I think #144 is it.
Green Cobby is right there also and you can find really nice examples, in lower grades, to easily fit the budget. This was in the 10k range a few years back, in the BST area. Thanks again, Tony. Love this card.

https://luckeycards.com/greencobb.jpg



.

My apologies to Leon and to the forum. I shall endeavor to avoid political crap in my posts.

How did this one get in here?

Attachment 565042

...or...if condition isn't your priority:

Nah! You probably couldn't get a loan for this one:

Attachment 565043

When I was about 25 in 2002 or so, I sold a G-ish (creased) but still fantastic looking '52 Topps #312 Jackie for 500 bucks. In my defense, I made money on it and couldn't afford what I had paid for it to begin with. Ooops. Oh well...

Today after getting back into the hobby in earnest in my late 30's, I have a fairly decent sized, 99% postwar collection. I suppose I could move the bulk of it and pair down to only 5-10 truly "iconic" cards which could include some prewar the likes of Ruth or Cobb, but so far have never been motivated to do that. I guess we'll see if that changes one day.

For me, it's these:

1) 1952 Topps Jackie Robinson
2) 1933 Goudey #53 (Yellow) Babe Ruth
3) 1951 Bowman Willie Mays
4) 1948 Leaf Jackie Robinson
5) A centered 1954 Topps Hank Aaron

55% of a Wagner
 

850K would be the estimate (didn't this just sell?)

As much as I love card collecting, I would never buy a card for $15,000 unless I knew I could sell it the next day for that amount or more very quickly to more than one party...meaning, it has to be a deal....

Now, I would spend $15,000 on a game used jersey all day long......

:)

To each their own - that's the beauty of the hobby, when it is a hobby (rather than a game of hot potato)!

If he has 15K to spend on a card, he's asking for advice on which card to buy that will do exactly that. For me, I would buy the best "big" card (exhibit, etc) that I could afford. But it's the wrong card, the market is limited. But the market isn't limited for the cards he's looking at. he just wants the best one.

Jerseys are tuff cause you can't easily photomatch older jerseys. Newer ones are easier. I have about 30 jerseys that are all matched. But older ones, if I can't photomatch it, there's too much fraud out there.

To each his own, if there was only one right way to collect, everything would be too limited!

LOL - I actually would probably spend $15K on a card....just haven't found the right one yet! The game used stuff keeps getting in the way....

Not enough dollars to go around and gamers take precedence, for me anyway....

Since joining last year, I have been amazed to see some of the card collections and individual cards people have displayed.....very impressive.....

I thought I had a decent collection till I got here. Very humbling.

Relatable, but I figure if my pre-war baseball card collection is anywhere close to average by Net54 standards, it's still better than what 99.9999% of people have. Not that most of those other people have any interest in owning a pre-war baseball card, but still.

Yeah, that is pretty iconic right there in that grade, :eek::eek: I would be happy looking at that too.

Can you really get a PSA 4.5 52 topps Jackie centered like that for 15K? That's the question? I have one in that grade that is so nice I wouldn't take 15 for a down payment on mine, :D

Anyway, Can't go wrong with any of those. The problem is I want them all!!!!! Buy first,:p sell later?

Yeah, these guys are sickening here...:DIf I had their cards, I'd burn mine!!!

It's a marathon, not a sprint. Enjoy the ride.

One card at a time, takes patience, sacrifice, and commitment. I don't know how many times I put off the kitchen remodel to get that Cobb card...

Thanks!
And this one was bought for a little over 12k, 3 1/2 years ago....it would probably be more today. I can look at Cobbs , from this series, all day long.

I’d also add a low grade high eye appeal 48 leaf Robinson to this list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I will be answering in terms of investment since price is being factored into the question.

1954 Topps Hank Aaron.

PSA 7's are hovering around the 15k mark. If you want a nicely centered one, you'll have to pay a bit more. But one can certainly be picked one up at that price still.

Sure, you can also go with a low grade 33 Goudey Ruth or even a low to mid-grade red/green Cobb, but the way I see it, when comparing to the Aaron RC, the Cobb(s) came out about 50 years earlier and the Ruth was about 25 years later. But the Aaron (PSA 7) is already at the same price point as those other two. That and it being a PSA 7 tells me that in the long run, the Aaron would be at a much higher price point in the years to follow than those other two iconic cards.

If Pre-War isnt a prerequisite, The Nolan Ryan rookie is pretty iconic. you could get a very nice 8 or 8.5 for under your 15K limit.

If you really are looking at this from an investment standpoint as well as not restricting it to pre-war, and are willing to do a bit of gambling, what about high-grade rookie cards of various players currently not in the HOF, for whatever reason(s), but who would be in there most definitely if they were just considered for their stats alone. Like Pete Rose, Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens, Bary Bonds, and the like. There is a chance, and a good one I think, that some, if not maybe all, these and similar type players do end up in the HOF some day. And if/when that/those day/days come, I can see such HOF recognition tremendously adding to their card values, especially to their rookie cards in high-grades.

Rose is out because of being banned from baseball for gambling. But with the hypocritical way in which MLB, and pretty much all major sports, seem to have changed their thinking and willingly embraced and aligned themselves with the gambling industry in recent years, I wonder if he won't eventually get in after all. Albeit, I'm guessing MLB will continue to make him pay by not allowing it to happen until after he's passed away, so he can't enjoy it and rub it into anyone's face that put him down about it before. And hopefully along with him, they'll finally let a deserving, IMO, Joe Jackson in as well.

And with all the other rule changes and ways they keep changing the game and how it is played today, I can eventually see some of the alleged (and even proven) PED users eventually being allowed into the HOF as well. Times and thinking keep changing, and it is likely that so many more MLB players were involved with PEDs as well back then, but it is just the superstar players, like those I previously mentioned, that seem to be the only ones that got the headlines and backlash for taking part in what was most likely rampant and spread across the entire sport. And then coupling that with the total farce of how MLB dealt with the admitted, collusive cheating actions and activities of the Houston Astros, and the literal non-punishment given any of the players because of that. It just seems to illustrate and present a very much more critical and biased point of view and thinking towards the PED users. The Astros' sign-stealing scheme was not a sport wide action or activity being done by any other teams or players, and was found to be 100% proven and true. But literally no repercussions or punishment at all, even in terms of damage to players reputations and how they are viewed by the media and members of the BBWAA (who vote for the inductees to the HOF) seems to have occurred. Were Jose Altuve to retire today, is there any doubt he wouldn't get serious 1st ballot HOF consideration in five years? Meanwhile, the likes of McGwire, Bonds, and Clemens were doing what likely tons of players across all the teams in the majors were doing, but they somehow seem to be singled out and their punishment amplified. It is commonly thought/felt that the likes of McGwire, Bonds, and Clemens would have easily had HOF level careers without the alleged use of PEDs. So why do they appear to be subject to different levels of punishment and treatment than those players that were suspected cheaters throwing spitballs, using corked bats, or even having team employees using cameras to steal signs from other teams during games for them? There is a certain level of hypocrisy that clearly exists, and I feel that eventually that will change and at least some of those alleged (or even proven) PED using players will eventually get elected to the HOF. And were I to guess, I've always thought McGwire would be the first to finally break through that barrier, as he is probably the most liked and media friendly of the early superstar PED users, and therefore, possibly they first one to be given the benefit of the doubt, and finally let in the HOF as a full-fledged inductee. And then I can see other alleged/proven PED users eventually getting in as well, depending on how nice and friendly they are/were to others, during and after their playing days. Here you go, and you can take the savings below $15K to maybe buy a lower condition T206 Cobb or some other iconic pre-war card.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/22494113729...256b4957044430

https://www.ebay.com/itm/31450020082...7580d49e6447cc

https://www.ebay.com/itm/26441471321...452dca5c389e75

Great card Jon and let’s add a little writing to the back like paper loss.