3 T200 at small auction

[Archive]

Posted By: jge15

Anybody notice the T200's [Phili Clev Wash[ on Proxibid at music city auction also some early spalding sports equipment How hard would it be to put together a top graded T200 set
thanks Jon

[Archive]

Posted By: Craig W

Hi Jon,

I'm not an expert on T200's but I'm very, very slowly working on a PSA 3 set. In eBay open auctions, common teams of that grade will run you about $250 ea. You can double that for Clev & NY Amer. T200s are fairly obtainable thru eBay up to PSA 4 / SGC 50, but rarely do I see any of what I'd consider High Grade (PSA 7 and above).

I know it's not much, but hope it helps you out.

Best Regards,
Craig

[Archive]

Posted By: bruce Dorskind

The reason you rarely see a T 200 in PSA 7 or above is that only 1% of 707 T200 cards
that have been graded by PSA grade 7 or above

In fact, 7 cards grade 7 and there is a single 8. Most of these cards are in one collection.

Only 15 cards have graded 6

SGC's grading has been even tougher. Only 10 of the 857 cards graded by SGC have achieved
a grade of 80 or above. There have been 5 80s 4 84s and a single 88

Ultra high grade T 200's are rare indeed- and will not likely ever find their way onto E Bay


Bruce Dorskind
America's Toughest Want List

[Archive]

Posted By: Griffins

Agreed with Bruce. Top graded T200's are very, very difficult. And you'll have to duke it out with at least 3 different collectors.
Besides condition issues, there are tiers of scarcity.
NY AL and both St Louis teams are tough, Boston NL is a killer. About half the set is easy (in lower mid grade), and then it gets increasingly tougher.
Great set though, and when there aren't major cracking issues and the images are sharp can be really beautiful.

[Archive]

Posted By: jge15

Thanks for the response I might try to put a mid grade set together

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Even putting together a VG-EX set will prove a challenge.

The combination of thin paper stock and a glossy surface make these very susceptible to cracking and creasing. I would focus more on getting them all with strong photos, and worry less about the numerical grade.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim

Can someone with more knowledge than myself about this issue explain the big differences in price from one team to another and why some teams are more scarce than others?

I finally picked up the Boston National team card last month thanks to a board member, but when it came to price I almost wish I was a fan of another team. j/k

[Archive]

Posted By: boxingcardman

Pittsburg: Wagner on a T card

Cleveland: Shoeless Joe Jackson on a T card

Giants: Jim Thorpe on a T card.



Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason L

I could not have said it more succinctly.

Those are the exact reasons that I own only those 3 cards in the set, in addition to my Cubbies.

But also, with the NY Giants card, you get some of the most storied characters of the era...that card has ridiculous firepower.
McGraw
Mathewson
Thorpe
Snodgrass
Doyle
Marquad
Merkle
Meyers

the only one missing is the crazy pitcher whose name is escaping me for some reason...

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron Patton

...Bugs Raymond

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim

I understand that some of the price differences are due to the players pictured on the cards, but is there a scarcity issue that drives the prices of some of the teams?

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony N.

I think so.
According to Lipset, Phil AL, Boston AL, NY NL, Brooklyn, Cleveland and Cincinnati are "unusually common"
Cubs, WhiteSox are "moderately more difficult". He rates NY AL and both St. Louis teams, along with Boston AL as more difficult, with NY NL and St Louis AL the toughest. I'd disagree on this last part, as I feel Boston NL is the toughest card in the set, with NY AL and the Browns a bit easier, and the Cards a bit easier still.
I've never seen a reason for any of this.


edited to fix typo.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Combined SGC+PSA Populations:

BOSTON AMERICANS130
BOSTON NATIONALS35
BROOKLYN NATIONALS90
CHICAGO AMERICANS96
CHICAGO NATIONALS79
CINCINNATI NATIONALS104
CLEVELAND AMERICANS154
DETROIT AMERICANS71
NEW YORK AMERICANS50
NEW YORK NATIONALS131
PHIL. AMERICANS141
PHIL. NATIONALS129
PITT. NATIONALS122
ST. LOUIS AMERICANS50
ST. LOUIS NATIONALS61
WASH. AMERICANS112

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim

Thanks for that information Matt. It's telling of why the Boston National is so high. I would love to hear some thoughts on why there is such a difference in the numbers.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

Tim,

The lowest population cards were the crappiest teams.

Either fewer cards were produced, fewer cards were purchased, or fewer cards were saved of those teams.
Or all of the above.


Boston Nationals is the toughest - so nice going in picking that one up.


I posted earlier.... but my post didn't take.....
Jon -
go for the set.

Incredible photos, full of great players and hofers.....

it is definitely my favorite T set.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Joe - interesting suggestion. Here are the 1912 standings:

AL Team W L WL% GB
BostonRS BOS 105 47 .691 --
Washngtn WSH 91 61 .599 14.0
Phildlpa PHA 90 62 .592 15.0
ChicagoW CHW 78 76 .506 28.0
Clvlnd CLE 75 78 .490 30.5
Detroit DET 69 84 .451 36.5
St.Louis SLB 53 101 .344 53.0
NewYorkH NYY 50 102 .329 55.0

NL Team W L WL% GB
NewYorkG NYG 103 48 .682 --
Pittsbgh PIT 93 58 .616 10.0
ChicagoC CHC 91 59 .607 11.5
Cincnnti CIN 75 78 .490 29.0
Phildlpa PHI 73 79 .480 30.5
St.Louis STL 63 90 .412 41.0
Brooklyn BRO 58 95 .379 46.0
BostonBr BSN 52 101 .340 52.0