N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>John</b><p>So your making the hobby more exciting. Ohhhh I thought you were just bragging a little. <img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/smileys/143.gif"><br /><br />I agree the hobby needs to be more exciting so how about guys “The Nude Men & Women Of Baseball Card Collecting”.<br /><br />My vote for “Mr. December” Leon I already here he is one of the sexiest guys in the biz.<br />

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Stevenwouldanswerifheonlyknewhow</b><p>......OK, I'm lost<br /><br />Were Hess cards issued in 1886-8 as well?<br /><br /><img src="http://images.mastronet.com/images/Auction27/photographs/28904.jpg">

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>No ... that's Elmer FOSTER ... who played for "New York" in 1886, took 1887 off apparently ... then played agains for New York in 1888 and 1889.<br /><br />What John was saying earlier in this thread is that Elmer only played for the NY METS in 1886 ... and then returned with the NY GIANTS in 1888 (on the Hess card)<br /><br /><br />It was Tom FORSTER (with an extra "R") who ONLY played for the New York Mets in 1886 and then NEVER played for ANY team from New York ever again.<br /><br />

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Thequestionman</b><p>....thanks for unconfusing me.

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Brian H (misunderestimated)</b><p>Since the n172 Old Judge set was issued over a few years -- 1887-90, I believe -- and different versions of players were issued of players during that time (some with team changes as well) it stands to reason that certain Old Judge's might be Rookies while others are effectively the first ever "traded/update" cards. <br /><br />For example, HOFers Clarkson, Kelly*, Thompson and McCarthy all switched teams during this time and I believe are pictured with both the earlier and later team in the Old Judge set: Clarkson and Kelly are shown with both Chicago and Boston; Thompson with Detroit and Philadelphia; and McCarthy with both Philadelphia and St. Louis. In each case, assuming the Old Judge is deemed the players Rookie card only the card showing the player on the first team would really be the "Rookie card". It would also be the case that any Player's League card would not be a Rookie if there is another card of that player in the set that does not indidcate a Players League affiliation since the Players League only came into existence following the 1889 season.<br />_________________________________________________ _____________________<br /> * Kelly cards with Chicago but identifying him as "$10,000 Kelly" must have been issued after Chicago sold him to Boston for $10,000. Otherwise, the "$10,000" is meaningless and would not have been printed on the card. (As a lawyer I am required to have a footnote).

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>Brian:<br /><br />Absolutely correct, and there are more HOF's than you listed who switched teams:<br /><br />Hamilton<br />Clarkson<br />Brouthers<br />Hanlon<br />Kelly (with footnote)<br />McCarthy<br />Rusie<br />Thompson<br /><br /><br />PLUS...you also have to be careful because some of the OJ's are actually MINOR league cards:<br /><br />Beckley - St. Louis Whites<br />Kid Nichols - Omaha<br /><br /><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />I have been careful in purchasing OJ's over the years to make sure and get ONLY the ones that could be considered their FIRST major league cards.<br /><br />Unfortunately, PSA mislabeled my McCarthy as "St. Louis" instead of "Phila."... even though it says "Phila" right on the card. <img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14>

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Jay Miller</b><p>Hal--Let me put one of the discussions to rest. I know who has, and have seen, the Just So Cy Young. It is undoctored and beautiful. I also believe that Giant/Met K-Bats were a different issue than the Phillies/Athletics K-Bats.

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>No, what you saw was the "D. T. Young" card that came in the "Just So" set.<br /><br />Everyone knows that "Down Town Young" was just a journeyman second-sacker who hit a buck-forty-eight and got send down from Cleveland to Toledo at the end of the 1893 season.<br /><br /><br />

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Brian H (misunderestimated)</b><p>I don't really think of Hanlon's Old Judge (or Sparky Anderson's 1959 Topps card for that matter) as his "Rookie Card", because he plainly wasn't a Hall of Fame player. He was a Hall of Fame manager who had a fair playing career before Managing. The same would hold for, among others, Connie Mack, Tommy Lasorda and Casey Stengel. <br /><br />Obviously, as with all things Rookie card related great minds may reasonably differ...

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Joe_G.</b><p>You have to give Hanlon a little credit, he may be in the HOF for his managing accomplishments, but he was a solid player as well. Over his 13 year career he managed to finish top 5 in the League at least once for walks, stolen bases, & home runs. He was a solid player / team captain during his playing days. Give him a little love, certainly a better player than the other HOF managers you've listed.<br />

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Kevin Cummings</b><p>"The Old Perfesser" wasn't a great player (certainly not HOF caliber), but he was more than serviceable. He was a good fielder (he personally taught Mickey Mantle how to play the outfield wall caroms in Ebbetts Field before the Yakns played the Dodgers there in the World Series) and he was a great World Series performer himself.<br /><br />Plus, how can you not love a guy who comes up with quotes like:<br /><br />"<b>Being with a woman all night never hurt no professional baseball player. It's staying up all night looking for a woman that does him in.</b>" <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>DD</b><p>Should the 1914 Baltimore News Babe Ruth card be considered his rookie? Although it shows him on his minor league team, he spent more than half the year in the Big Leagues.

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Hey guys- let me yet again clear up some of the mysteries of the endlessly debated Cy Young Just So. Yes, it does exist, I have both held it and have a photocopy of it. The hoard of Just So's that it came with ( a total of seven) was purchased by this "mystery" collector after he read an article about them in SCD and hounded the family for years until they finally agreed to sell him all seven. Since he is a good friend of mine he consigned the other six to one of my 1998 auctions and five of them ended up in one collection; it would have been part of the "Southern Gentleman" collection that Mastro had in 2000 but they were sold privately by the owner before the auction. They are now dispersed around the hobby.<br /> Also, disparaging the validity of the cards in my friend's great collection because they have not been slabbed is a silly and fallacious statement. He has been both a sophisticated and knowledgable collector for his entire life and believes that he can make his own determination about whether his cards are both authentic and untampered. I know them well and can trace most of them back to their previous owners. I can tell you they are all real and those with obvious and visible flaws- he knows that the Creighton and Brooklyn Atlantics are trimmed- are no secret to anyone. They don't need slabs that read "authentic." THEY ARE AUTHENTIC, no more need be said. And interestingly, cards are not even the focus of this great collection- they might be just the tip of the iceberg of perhaps the greatest historical collection ever assembled.<br /> I hope those who are doubting the authenticity of the Cy Young are doing so tongue in cheek, because take it from me- and I've been around the baseball card block a few times- it's real and it's spectacular (I know at least a few Seinfeld fans get my drift).

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>Barry, those are the cruelest words in the English language. For those of you who are not Seinfeld fans, "they're real and they're spectacular" translates roughly to "they'll never be yours, you can't touch, and you can't even look."

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>You are correct. It refers equally to both the Cy Young Just So and to Teri Hatcher; they are both unattainable. But at least you can see her in all her glory in "Desperate Housewives" (not a very good show, but she is as beautiful as ever).

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Jay Miller</b><p>I would post pictures of the N. Y. Giant HOFers from the K-Bat set(Ewing, Keefe, Ward, O'Rourke and Connor) but they live in the bank. There are pictures of several in the Copeland catalog, including the unique Ewing and Ward. Most of the N. Y. Giant cards came from an amazing find by Ron Oser. BTW, there is no known Welch although there was a Jos Wood image from which a card could have been made. Perhaps one will someday be found.

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Peter Thomas</b><p>As I remember it, it was they are real, they are spectacular, and they could have been yours if you had just believed, but now you will never see or touch them.

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>Surely EVERYBODY on this site knows me well enough by now to know whether or not I was just being facetious about the Cy Young card.<br /><br />In fact, when have I ever NOT been joking?<br /><br /><img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>DD</b><p>Hal,<br />Visited your web site again and couldn't find the 1932 U.S Caramel Lindy Lindstrom card. Looks like someone hacked your site and replaced his rookie card with a measly PSA 7 1933 Goudey. Thought since you are a lawyer, you can investigate and have charges brought against the cur that did this. LOL

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>......... psssst<br />.......................psssst, .... Gator.<br /><br />Ova heah.<br /><br />Why dontya liten up an get a sensa huma?<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />heh heh heh <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Bruce Babcock</b><p>M101-5<br /><br /><img src="http://homepage.mac.com/thurber51/.Pictures/Fronts%20&%20Backs/M101-5%20%20Globe%20Stengel.JPG">

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>BlackSoxFan</b><p>amazing what reading will dig up!<br><br>Regards,<br />Black Sox Fan<br /><br />- - - - - - - - -<br /><br />I'm Smart Enough To Know, There Are A Lot Of People Who Know More Than I Know<br /><br /><a href=www.blacksoxfan.com target=new>BlackSoxFan.com</a><br /><a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Rob</b><p>This thread is breaking my heart... <img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14>

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>KEVIN CUMMINGS<br /><br />Casey hit the very 1st and 2nd HRs in Yankee Stadium in<br /> World Series play (1923). Also, Stengel has the highest career World Series<br /> batting average = .393 of any major leaguer.<br /><br />LEON and HAL<br /><br />I might add, my research in writing an article on the GOODWIN CHAMPIONS<br />(N162) in VCBC (Issue #27), May-June 2001, leads me to believe this set<br />was really issued in 1889 (not 1888). The key to this theory is the Fred<br />Dunlap card that states he is the Pittsburg Captain. Dunlap was traded to<br />Pittsburg (from Detroit) during the 1888 season.<br /><br />These beautiful cards must of been produced very late in 1888.<br /><br />Also, I have the Album (ACC A36) that depicts all 50 of these cards, and<br />it is dated 1889.<br /><br />

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>That's what makes this board so great!<br /><br />Information you cannot get anywhere else!<br /><br />

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>BcDaniels</b><p>That Clarkson is a darn nice card-just wondering,are you done with PSA?

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>Just a bump to bring it back again

N28 Allen & Ginters NOT from 1887 ??
 

Posted By: <b>Jay</b><p>Hal--Welcome back. I can't speak for others but I missed your posts. Two points to note about the dates of vintage sets:<br /><br />1-N Y Kalamazoo Bats are 1886 cards and thus may be contemporaneous with N167s<br /><br />2-N172s were first issued in late 1886. Their issue was after N167s but still prior to all the "new" 1887 material. I have outlined the reasons why I believe this in a prior post.