Vintage Commons, worth it or not

[HOF Yankees]

basically this thread is for those lonely commons that dont get bought, only if a set is being put together but are they worth it? What i mean is i see vintage commons in high end 8's and 9's for low price and seem not to get the love they deserve, i see on auction houses that commons can sell for big money but to me is not about the money its collectability. i pick as much yankees commons as possible cause i believe they are great the color, condition, overal appearance.

I leave it up to u all, commons worth it or no?

[David W]

I collect St. Louis Cardinals, so I pick up commons of them, but I'm not paying big bucks for 8's and 9's of Dal Maxville, Mike Tyson, or Don Blasingame.

Actually I prefer those cards raw anyway, so grading them actually decreases my interest most of the time.

[Doug]

I really don't have any use for commons unless I'm putting together a set of some kind. At one time I had a T206 and a 1952 Topps Reds team set so I needed the commons, but otherwise I normally just stick to HOF singles. It also depends on what you define as a common. In my 1952 Topps set there were guys like Wally Post, Roy McMillan, Joe Nuxhall, and Ted Kluszewski which could technically be called "commons", but to a Reds fan they were significant players.

[ALR-bishop]

I collect all Topps sets and recognized variations within the sets, so I don't view them as commons, just more piece parts. I display my cards in binders in my office, so even if I buy graded cards to get something I need, I crack them out for display anyway ( unless there is an authenticity issue, such as the 67 Maris Yankee proof)

[Exhibitman]

It has been an interesting evolution w/r/t postwar cards. When slabbing started 8 seemed to be the magic number for postwar cards. 6s and 7s were still collectible and did OK but 8s were the cards people went nutty for. 9 and 10 were so hard to find that they demanded premiums but little attention. As the populations rose, though, the hype shifted over to 9s and 10s. 8s lost some of their heat and 7s had stagnated for quite some time before the Great Recession; 6s and below had fallen off the radar. I was picking up nice 6s and 7s at $5 each at the National over the last few years. Now you can barely get that for the cards of the 70s.

Personally, I decided long ago to stay away from the 8-9-10 area, primarily because I saw too little difference in eye appeal to justify the $$ premium. I downgraded my postwar 8s and 9s to 6s and 7s and used the extra bux to buy more cards. That hasn't changed for me, although over the last two years I have gradually shifted from buying graded cards at all to "dumpster diving" at major shows in bins of raw cards for nice raw cards of the postwar era. A lot easier to collect (physically, that is) and a heck of a lot cheaper too.

[Jim VB]

Commons? Yeah. I've got a few.

[HOF Yankees]

great stuff, jim nice binders, are those all players from the set that has the card shown on the binder

[Jim VB]

If I understand your question correctly, the answer is yes. I selected one card from each set as an example. I scanned it (OK, in some cases I stole a scan from VCP. It was easier that way.) I printed out a full size 8 x 10 for the pouch on the front cover. I printed another sheet selecting 9 cards at a time printed on one page, cut them out, and attached them to the spines for the matching year. So what you see there are not real cards, but home printed pictures on a heavier card stock. (I think it's 110 lb. stock. It the thickest that will go through my printer without jamming.)

The binders are basic Avery Heavy Duty Display binders from Staples. Baseball gets black. Basketball gets blue. Non-sports gets white. Size varies by how many sheets I need. (Smaller binders had to get smaller pics, obviously.)

Most cards are ungraded and in 9 pocket pages. Graded cards are in 4 pocket pages in the front of the binder.

I'm still short about 40-50 cards from 1952, 1954, 1960 and 1961, but everything else is complete. I try to knock off at least one set each year. This year, I finally finished 1957.