Advice requested for a collector at a crossroad

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

I've been collecting cards since I'm a kid and have really started getting serious the past 5 years or so in the vintage area. Anyway, I find myself as one of the set collectors who track down every card in high grade for a set until it's done and then start another set or two. The expense in completing a high grade vintage set can be very high both in the monetary and time senses. Anyway, while I don't necessarily love every player I'm collecting in each set, I do love the feeling of accomplishment in finishing a set and knowing that I've got every card, and sometimes every variation, in a set. I suppose it's an anal, obsessive/compulsive sort of thing but it is what it is. My dilemma is that there are certain players that I just love to collect: Hank Greenberg, Cobb, Matty, Hal Chase, Mantle, etc. that I just don't put the resources into because so much is tied up in full sets (of which I have dozens, many of them vintage and all in high grade). I'm wondering if the satisfaction I get from completing a full set is worth more than the satisfaction I'd have in getting high grade examples of just a handful of the players that are my alltime favorites. I honestly don't know the answer, so I'm looking for some feedback as to why the set collectors do what they do and why do the player collectors do what they do - at the expense of not collecting a full yearly set or a certain player. Part of me wants to liquidate my sets and go hog wild on just all of the Cobbs and Mattys I can find (it would certainly cut down on the storage space allotted to my collection). Thanks in advance for the advice.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe Tocco

and single-player collecting is the most rewarding path I've taken as a collector. It allows you to learn first-hand the nuances of so many different sets, and every single card you buy is of a player you love. I'd recommend picking a player or 2 and trying it.

Joe

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

I was a set collector and seem to have made the type of switch you are speaking of - focussing on the cards of players I like and in the sets I like. I have not been able to bring myself to break up completed sets to generate funds, but it is an interesting prospect.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Al Crisafulli

Jeff, I totally understand.

A few years ago, to give my collecting a little focus, I decided to build a run of sets from each year the Yankees won the World Series. I figured that would give me 26 sets to work on, spanning virtually every era, and encompasses some great sets and some big cards.

After five sets, I got bored and frustrated, and started thinking about "re-purposing" my collection. But at the same time, the 26-set challenge seemed like a great long-term project.

After learning a little from some collector friends (many of whom participate on 54), I decided to start a HOF type card set as well. I've found it to be the most fun I've ever had in the hobby. I still work on my "Yankee run" (working on 1928, 1939 and 1962 right now), but I do it more sparingly, and find myself devoting a lot more time to the HOF players. I've learned a lot about obscure card types, and have picked up some cards that are now among my favorites in my collection.

Good luck, whatever you choose.

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Jeff, why can't you do both? I don't mean double the money you spend on cards, but rather - sell off some of your sets, and use those funds to go after the players you like. Keep your favorite sets and continue to build those. You don't have to be a set collector and only collect sets. And you don't have to be a Cobb & Matty collector and only collect those guys.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

Jeff,

I am generally a HOF collector. I simply dont like spending large sums of money on common players to complete a set. However, even though I may desire to one day have one example of each HOFer, I definitely find myself concentrating on a select few (grover, cobb, matty, big train, etc.). I truly enjoy collecting these cards w/o worrying about completing the sets.

That said, last year, after winning a lot with several e93s, I decided to take the plunge and see what it was that the set collectors liked so much. Now, a year or so later, as Im waiting on the last card needed to complete my e93 set to arrive, I can say it was fun and provides a nice challenge. I still hate that I spent a lot of money on commons, but they are generally very pleasing cards nonetheless. I will probably never sell my e93s and will instead try to continually upgrade the set (of course, if I do sell, it will only be the commons and dups I obtain trying to upgrade).

Dont know if that really answered your question or not - just my thought process. Cmoking has it right - just do both.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ray

I'm a compulsive set collector, such as you are/were. But I also collect one single player's cards - Bobby Doerr. Set collecting can be very frustrating at times when you've put in a lot of time and effort and realize how slow along it is going, or how hard it is to get the card(s) you need. I'm not nearly as well off as many of the guys on this site, so for vintage, I stick to low/mid range grades so I'm not spending a ton of money. When it gets too frustrating, I take a break for a few weeks and focus strictly on Doerr cards, or selling the ones I don't need/want anymore.

I, like you, do feel that sense of accomplishment when finishing a set. I also, like you, think its an OCD thing.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cat

There are a couple of things to consider. First, you seem to have an appreciation for higher grade cards. If you focus on players, high grades are not always available. I have many low grade cards, many of which are extremely difficult to upgrade. How are you going to feel if you have cards that look like some of mine shown below? They are pretty rough, but finding higher grades is not easy.

Second, if you get a lot of satisfaction out of “completion,” you may find that there is never a feeling of completion when you collect players. In a sense, there never seems to be and end point when collecting players unless you map out exactly what you want your collection to be when it is “complete.”

If those things don’t bother you, then a player focus is going to give you a lot of satisfaction. As others have said, at least you won’t be using funds on marginal players (it has to be a little frustrating to hand over a small stack of $100 bills for a PSA 8 Benny Bengough 33 Goudey card when in fact his career stats add up to approximately one good year for Piazza).

I don’t do sets…only players and mostly a focus on rookies or their “primary card.” I don’t know if this takes more or less time than set collecting, but if you are partially doing both types of collecting, then obviously you are investing huge amounts of time. Personally, I am trying to cut down on the time I spend collecting. It is my personal belief that player collecting, as apposed to set collecting, is a bit more difficult because you may spend several months collecting the 33 Goudeys, as an example, and learn about and know that set very well (prices of commons, variations if any, printing nuances, you may have pop reports memorized, etc, etc.) but with player collecting you are constantly looking at cards of different sets and that homework never stops. I feel like I am always on a steep learning curve. I learned so much about the M101-4/5 and then went several months without looking at another M101-4/5 card, so then I had to go back and brush up when a new purchase was about to be made. Focusing on a certain set, probably avoids this time consuming part of collecting.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

There are sets other than those with ACC designations. For example a compilation of cards of Cobb, Greenberg and Mantle can easily comprise most card types in the 1900s. There you have a type set with just three players. Add Anson and you have most bases covered.

There are many other options, all of which are sets, although not necessarilly manufacturer oriented sets. And you can choose one that you really want to include each card. The HOFers, 500 Club, Triple Crown winners, etc.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

I think you're better off as a single card rather than set collector, Jeff, from a monetary standpoint as too often the total cost of buying all the cards (card by card)exceeds the value of the completed set. That said, I am a set collector as there is something inside of me that makes me try and be a completist once I start. There is a certain sense of accomplishment in completing a set, especially tough ones with lots of cards like the T207 and M116.