Stars v. Joe Schlabotnik...

[jchcollins]

Just a topic of curiosity out there for those of you that collect older cards, but aren't necessarily set collectors (like me...):

What are your thoughts on collecting Hall of Famers and stars vs. other - lesser - players and maybe teams? For those of you that don't go for complete sets - do you tend more towards the big names only, or just certain other players / teams / oddballs / moment-related things?

Last time I checked, there were nearly 18,000 players who had set foot on a major league field since the 1870's - and of that number, only slightly more than 300 are in the HOF. 1.6%? Clearly the vast majority of the players who are responsible for the memory of baseball in our collective psyche's are not the Babe Ruth's, Ted Williamses, Willie Mayses, and Joe DiMaggio's. This used to bother me somewhat as a kid as I realized that a lot of my focus at least then - was only on HOFer's. Since then I have become a Cubs fan - which led me to realize that there may lie unlimited joy in collecting scores of cards of players with no chance of ever making the Hall.

This is one of the reasons I enjoy Boyd & Harris's "The Great American Baseball Card Flipping, Trading, & Bubble Gum Book" (known simply as "The Book" in many circles) so much. Not only are the cards presented shown in believable (not mint) shape, but the focus is largely on players with no chance of ever making the HOF...

So yeah this is kind of broad, but...discuss:




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ALR-bishop]

Although a set collector I would love to get ahold of a Joe Schlabotnic card . I have seen some fantastic cards in his name, usually with his face obscured by some embarrassing event.

I do know people who collected all cards presented in the Flipping Book. Would guess there are some Cub fans who collect all Cub players, either pre war, post war or both. Frankhardy who posts here sometimes has a thread on CU in which he has posted a Cardinal collection that includes at least all post war Topps cards, including insert, oddball and test sets

[ALR-bishop]

[jchcollins]

So that would be Rizzo - who is pretty much the alter-ego of any player even close to Joe Schlabotnik. :-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ALR-bishop]

At the time the card was produced It may have fit fine


I have seen other cards like it with him on different teams. He is always falling or in a awkward position with his face covered. I would like to get one at some point

[Kurri17]

Interesting topic. As I thought about my response, I found that aside from my team collecting projects, most cards that I seek out are of stars. Maybe not HOFers, but players of some note. But, over the last few years and a continuing slow project has been picking up graded copies of my beloved '70s A's. Moved to Cali as a kid in '72, fell in love with he A's and continued following them until Finley tore them apart. I am close to having all of the '70 to '77 Kellogg's A's in graded form, and continue adding Topps, and even Hostess graded copies over time. That said, Dick Green is obviously not a HOFer, but he is a star in my personal baseball perspective. Along with Tenace, Holtzman, Campaneris, etc. I think this outlook was very prevalent in pre-80s collecting, kids loved their teams and often had a favorite player who was just a typical big leaguer due to some personal memory or experience. I wonder how true that would be today, with the bombardment of media.

[JLange]

Over the years my focus has shifted from stars to HOFers to stars of just one team. My most recent interest though took the single team concept to the limit with their all time list of players, coaches, managers, owners, broadcasters,and others connected to the team. My list expanded to more than 2000 individuals almost overnight, and created a challenge for me unlike any prior collecting. There is a real scarcity factor (not just manufactured scarcity) in that some players have no known cards with the team. This has led me on a wonderful pursuit through every catalogued set and every team issued set just to figure who has a card and who does not. I also found great interest in RPPCs and press photos to help fill in the gaps. I now pursue "collectibles" for guys with only a handful of MLB plate appearances or innings pitched (or less!) with the same zest that I used to have for stars and HOFers alone. I can't say this will be my last collecting makeover, but it has been my most enjoyable. I can also name hundreds of players from all eras for my chosen team, for anyone who would care to listen. Useless I'm sure to everyone but me!

[RayBShotz]

Yes interesting topic.
I love commons. The reality, especially if you collect graded cards is that the returns have diminished greatly in set collecting value because of the vast population of commons now in slabs.
I've been more careful to make HOF selections as often as commons these days so I cover all bases.
I still do have a set collecting mentality but I tend to be fairly unfocused so different, unattainable forays often have to be abandoned.
It's fun to own them for a while though, and there is noting wrong with collection churn.
Why not expose yourself to every card issue the hobby has to offer.
There's lots of fun inherent in what we do.
Men acting like boys collecting cardboard.
RayB

[Exhibitman]

I have never been a fan of set building. I collect only a few small ones. I go for the big names only, plus a few lesser favorite players. And also some of the more interesting classic cards

[irv]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I have never been a fan of set building. I collect only a few small ones. I go for the big names only, plus a few lesser favorite players. And also some of the more interesting classic cards

I don't own a copy of that card yet (been outbid) but it also caught my eye the first time I seen it.