![]() |
1941 Yankee Baseball---Let's have some FUN for a change!
4 Attachment(s)
An old (72, like me!) HS friend contacted me about a baseball he has & wanted my advice & opinion of it. I have already done some research, studied the pics he sent & sent him my opinion a couple days ago.
I thought it would be fun to see what you folks had to say, in a similar vein to David's 1927 Yankee ball thread. I am by no means an auto expert, but I rendered my opinion based on my collecting experience of yrs in the hobby & my research of this particular ball. Am curious to see if MY results compare to what you guys see or if I gave bad advice I can contact my friend & change it! Here's what I'd like to know: 1-On a scale 1-10, how would you rate the sigs? 2-What else do you see significant about this ball? 3- Any comments at all are welcome & appreciated Here are 3 pics & the list of names his Dad said were on the ball (One panel is not pictured--The Henrich-Dickey panel.) |
1
Joe d is not authentic 1941 and it was the 41st season in baseball? |
Sigs range from 2 - 7 in strength (with most around "3" - "4").
Joe D. is secretarial Possibly traced over in spots? A slightly "off-color" ink looks to be added in certain (otherwise light) areas. But would need to see the ball in person, to verify. |
2 - The number of signatures I could discern without looking at the list. ;)
|
I agree with what's been said so far. The signatures are quite weak--an arbitrary and subjective numerical scale doesn't mean too much--what's important is that most of the signatures are or are nearly illegible.
On the plus side it's an OAL ball, in excellent condition, and quite white for it's age. |
Thanks alot so far guys. I had told Mike (my friend) I rated the ball an overall 4-5 of 10 due to the fading sigs. I told him the Joe D was "clubhouse" and I think the Gomez is also.
Anyone agree or disagree on Gomez? --or any others as being "clubhouse"? (I know most are very hard to see!) |
I'd give the sigs a 2 - 3 at best.
To me, 4 or 5 might have some moderate skipping or sun fading, but would be complete and legible. Just my 2 cents. |
My question is where is the fun.:D
|
Shelly---
Thanks for your Joe D info! The fun would be in knowing what you think of the Lefty Gomez above Joe D---Clubhouse or authentic?
|
Ball was presented to me as a 1941. Usually a good "tell" is Johnny Sturm, who played in 124 games that yr and was never in the Majors again!
All players fit 1941 EXCEPT 1---Mel Queen--who was there in 1942-'44-'46 & '47. So, am I correct in assuming this ball was most likely signed during Spring Training of 1941 where Mel was most likely on the field but didn't make the team? He spent 1941 w/ 3 diff Yankee farm clubs, including AA Kansas City. |
Quote:
|
Mike--
Thanks for your reply--I appreciate it.
(I very politely invited Shelly & Richard S to reply in re: to the Gomez sig possibly being clubhouse & re: any scarce or rare sigs on the ball (such as Art Fletcher, who Richard deems RARE in his recent Sales Letter) but so far they have not replied.) |
Art Fletcher's is a quite common signature--perhaps it becomes more rare when you're trying to sell one.
He had a very distinctive "A," a large lower case style with an extra surrounding loop--just as it appears on your ball. |
Thanks David--very interesting! What about Red Branch & Charlie Stanceau? Any idea on their scarcity?
|
None at all. Sorry.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Attachment 99773 |
Shelly---
No being not clubhouse or not authentic? Your Lefty Gomez looks alot different to me than my Lefty Gomez, so I think you mean "not authentic"----and Thank You for replying--just trying to help an old friend w/ good, reliable advice!!
|
Quote:
|
Shelly--
You posted---From the looks of the ball below I will say NO on the Gomez
I was just trying to understand what your NO meant! I believed MY Gomez was "clubhouse" and you do too! We are in agreement---that's fun to me!:) |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:54 AM. |