Gehrig - 1939 playball

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob

Hi all, just a quick hello it looks like this board has a lot of great people and great info!

I've just recently started collecting the 1939 Playball set and noticed that Gehrig doesn't have a card in the set ... anyone know why? I like the set cuz its a simple design with b&w photographs (not colored-in) and good descriptions/info on the back of the card.

Thanks!
Rob

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

There are many players that Gum Inc. apparently never signed deals with, so I presume Gehrig was one of them. Since there is no Diamond Star or Batter-Up of him, it doesn't appear National Chicle signed him as well. But back to Play Ball cards, which were produced from 1939 to 1941, there is no Bob Feller, Lou Boudreau, Joe Medwick, Johnny Mize, Enos Slaughter, Lefty Grove, Ernie Lombardi, Luke Appling, Ted Lyons (these are just the HOFers) and many of the St. Louis Cardinals and all of the Chicago Cubs (except for a few "old-timers" in the 1940 set). Other missing Yankees include Red Rolfe and Joe Gordon ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Lou played only 8 games in 1939, taking himself out of the lineup on May 2nd. He did not play again. His "Luckiest Man" speech was on July 4th. The Playball cards most likely were printed during the season, not before.

So it seems to me that Lou's not in the 1939 Playball set because he wasn't in baseball when the set was prepared. The 1939 cards focus on players. The later 1940 set touches on coaches, managers and old timers, in addition to players.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Wouldn't the first series of 1939 Playball reflect the 1938 season?

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

I always figure most cards are created in the off-season, but a little research seems to prove that 1939 Play Balls were created at the beginning of the season. In particular, I notice that Luke Sewell's card shows him with the Indians. According to www.baseball-reference.com, Sewell was released by the Dodgers on 4/20 and signed by the Indians on 4/23. His first series card shows him in an Indians uniform. Meanwhile, Heinie Manush was released by the Pirates on 6/7. His card is also a low number. While this is all speculative, it seems reasonable to conclude that the first series was produced sometime in between 4/23 and 6/7. Gehrig, by the way, came out of the line-up on 5/2 ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Hey Barry,

In digging some 39 Playballs out, and looking at the backs, yes, they talk about what happened through the 1938 season.

Still, 8 games into the 1939 season Gehrig quits. I figure that a first year card isn't even being distributed until middle of the season, I don't know. But it seems to me that Gehrig quitting is more likely the reason he's not in 39 Playballs. Not that he was omitted as others were.

I guess I should sit down with the encyclopedia and figure out who all retired in 1938 and see if they have a Playball card in 1939. Only one that comes to mind is Dusty Cooke, who's in the Batter Up set, retired in 1938 (I confess to guessing that and looking it up just now, I didn't know), he's not in the 1939 Playball set.

Wouldn't it be wild if there are some 1939 Playball Gehrig cards out there in a file folder somewhere, where they were pulled from the set because of his health and retirement??? Card number 126 wasn't issued....

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Lou's last game was April 30th, 1939.

The May 2nd date is the day he walks the lineup card out and he's not on it.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/player.php?p=gehrilo01>


And I think Chris' perception that the 1939 Playballs came a bit late, after the season starts, makes sense. I think that's why Lou's not in there. Still, gotta wonder about card 126.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

You really need to go through the set one player at a time to make sense of how it was constructed.

On the subject of Gehrig, how come he appeared in 1933 and 1934 Goudey (and a major part of 1934 with "Lou Gehrig Says") but does not appear in 1935 or 1938 Goudey? When the 38 set came out, there was no inkling that his career was about to abruptly end.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Originally, the doctors couldn't really figure out what was wrong with Gehrig, he went from one expert to another. Finally, at the Mayo Clinic they diagnosed the seriousness of his condition.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Hey Barry,

Chuck Klein "says", too... he's on some of the 1935 Goudeys, and is in 1936, too. I don't think he's in 1938. But ol' Chuck was on a dozen of those 1934s, Lou was on 84... Maybe Lou wanted money, maybe other players ragged him about being on all the cards so he said no to being on any. Both are wild speculation, but given Lou's reputation as a good guy that last one seems the more likely of the two...

Dizzy Dean was the big name then, he's at the end of the 1933 Goudey's, in 1934 and 1935... but not in 36 or 38. I'd figure him for the biggest name in baseball at the time.

Frank.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Lou got the low numbers, Chuck got the high number series.

Both were MVP's in 1933, so they were given a little extra status (if memory serves, didn't they both win the Triple Crown that year?).

Edited to add I just looked it up- Klein won 1933, Gehrig in 1934.

[Archive]

Posted By: bill

Barry
it was Jimmy Foxx who was mvp in 1933
and he had the triple crown as did Klein
not gehrig

bill

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

And isn't Chuck just on the 12 national league high number cards??? Lou is on the bottom 72, then I think he's on the 12 american league high number cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike

Funny Foxx wasn't in the set, especially after the unreal year he had in 38. many times the reason certain players aren't in certain sets, will never be known. I guess half the fun is speculation.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

That's right- I remember there were two Triple Crowns in 1933, the only year it ever happened. It was Foxx. Thanks.

And if Klein is only on the NL high numbers, then Gehrig did get a little extra pull in that set.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Yep, Lou's got all of them from 1 - 72, Lou and Chuck share the high numbers, 12 for each.

Here's a few high number cards...

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Spaeth

Speaking of real as opposed to fake Goudey Ruths, why did he go from being the featured player in the 33 set to having no cards in the 34 to being depicted again in the 35?

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

That's another mystery we haven't been able to figure out. What better way to market a set than to have a card of Ruth?

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Guys,

Babe was probably going to a Goudey photo shoot, when he ran into a hot dog stand, he missed the photo shoot because he downed a dozen hot dogs. Subsequently, he went down to the tavern to down a half dozen beers and light up his favorite stogie.

Peter