Greg
The issue of reproducing original art work depicting famous players is subject of much litigation, statute law, constitutional protection, bullying and generally much confusion. Both Tiger Woods and The Three Stooges (ok, their estate) have taken great length to stamp out reproduction.
You may very well be on solid legal ground doing reproductions of your work, given the transformative talent, but the push back of a phalanx of lawyers is likely to wear you down.
Here's one article on it for the board from the California Lawyer magazine:
http://www.callawyer.com/cleStory.cf...=883760&evid=1
" Subsequent cases, however, have typically exalted the First Amendment over state law rights of publicity. The California Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment will trump the right of publicity as long as the defendant's use of the plaintiff's name, voice, or likeness involves "significant transformative elements" such that the defendant is not merely trading on the value of them. (Comedy III Productions, Inc. v. Saderup Inc., 25 Cal. 4th 387 (2001), holding that charcoal drawings of the Three Stooges violated the right of publicity because of their lifelike nature and lack of transformative elements;"