Are autographed cards taking over the ball as most desired signed collectible?

[OsFan]

Are autographed cards taking over the ball as most desired signed collectible? I remember a time when auto cards were somewhat of an afterthought. That seems to be changing.

[T206Collector]

When I was a kid in the 1980s, the conventional wisdom was that the signature ruined the value of the card being signed. Better to sign a ball or a picture or an index card and then put the card and the signature side by side.

That all changed for me when I got my first signed T206 of Rube Marquard in 2004 on ebay. It was -- and remains -- really compelling to me. 44 signed T206 cards later...



And don't get me even started on signed T201s...

[AFLfan]

I love signed cards because, at least to me, they represent a simple purity of the hobby. I also enjoy building vintage signed sets, as that type of collection forces me to actually learn about the player on the card, instead of simply about the card - tough to find centered, condition sensitive, etc.

I guess trading cards are considered to be the lowest form of autograph collecting, at least to those who charge staggered prices at paid signings. But that is just fine with me. I would prefer a signed card over a repro jersey, bat or ball any day.

[Bpm0014]

T206Collector: Wouldn't mind seeing your signed T206 collection again here...

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by Bpm0014

T206Collector: Wouldn't mind seeing your signed T206 collection again here...

As much as I'd love to paste it here, I've already done so a couple of entries above, and so will politely not post it again. But you are ALWAYS welcome to visit my collection on my website www.t206collector.com

As far as the OP's question, I guess I can't say that I ever understood what is the most desirable artifact to contain a signature of a player. I've never been much excited about game-used items, and though I have a few autographed baseballs, they strike me as somewhat impersonal. I love autographed cards because they represent yet another way to collect baseball cards. And, at my core, I'm a baseball card collector. I do not really consider myself an autograph collector, certainly not independently from my card collection.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

When I was a kid in the 1980s, the conventional wisdom was that the signature ruined the value of the card being signed.

I was fed the same story. I have come around to the coolness of signed cards, but still prefer signed equipment purely to mix up my already card-heavy collection....plus balls, bats, etc display better/easier than cards, IMO. But I would agree that the rising of the tide of signed Mantle and Ruth cards seems to be lifting all boats.

BTW, those signed T201's are awesome!

[GasHouseGang]

I've always liked signed cards. I have a few signed baseballs, but people always asked "Who's that signature?" I like to have the picture of the guy and his printed name, along with the signature. It makes a much better display piece in my opinion.

[MikeGarcia]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

I've always liked signed cards. I have a few signed baseballs, but people always asked "Who's that signature?" I like to have the picture of the guy and his printed name, along with the signature. It makes a much better display piece in my opinion.

....sometimes a fountain pen says so much more than just a name....these guys actually held these cards....cool....


..

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by MikeGarcia

....sometimes a fountain pen says so much more than just a name....these guys actually held these cards....cool......

These are gorgeous! Thanks for sharing!

Originally Posted by conor912

BTW, those signed T201's are awesome!

And thank you, too!