Why was card #106 in 1933 Goudey Lajoie?

insidethewrapper · #1 02-01-2019, 02:03 PM

Maybe Lajoie was bumped from the 1933 Sports King Set( only 3 baseball players) and they used that photo for the 1934 #106 replacement card.

jason.1969 · #2 02-01-2019, 03:14 PM

I'm not sure where I sit on the idea that the Lajoie was originally intended for the Sport Kings set, other than we'll probably never know this sort of thing.

However, let's pretend it's true. Here are some bits and pieces that might provide context.

First series of Sport Kings set probably issued in very late 1933, hence probably planned in Summer/Fall 1933. This included the Ruth and Cobb cards. In a set that would feature three baseball HOFers, I can't imagine anyone would question their inclusion as kings of their sport.

Let's pretend for a minute that the high number series at least initially was to include Lajoie. Personally I'd find him an odd choice for the third of three baseball players regardless of his New England roots. I would see at minimum Wagner, Young, or Johnson as more popular and celebrated. (Still, let's go with it.)

But then Carl Hubbell finishes an incredible 1933 season capped by a dominant World Series. His 1933 was so amazing that the back of his Sport Kings card leads with the line: "Rated as the outstanding performer of the sports world for 1933." Damn, how does Goudey NOT find a spot for Hubbell in the set? No doubt kids want Hubbell more than Lajoie.

Okay, move over, Napoleon. We need your spot for King Carl. And now there's a leftover Lajoie card ready for whatever occasion calls for it.

Note that this high number series was not issued before February 1934, so there was plenty of time to make a swap such as this. And note further that the Lajoie wasn't printed as a 1933 Goudey card until late 1934, so the timing works out on that side also.

I mentioned at the beginning that the inclusion of Lajoie as the third Sports King would have perplexed me. That said, the exact logic I'd employ to rule him out of Sport Kings would seemingly rule him out from card 106, so what do I know?

tedzan · #3 02-01-2019, 05:32 PM

To me...."it's elementary my dear Watson"....on why Hubbell , instead of Lajoie, in GOUDEY's SPORTS KING set. GOUDEY chose the two big hitters,
and they threw in (excuse the pun) a pitcher.
And, as you know, Carl Hubbell was the man of the year in 1933. Plus, he followed it up with 4 more consecutive years with 20+ victories per year.

What isn't elementary to me is GOUDEY modifying their printing standard format (1933 and 1934) of 24-card sheets to a 25-card sheet to include
Lajoie in the 1934 GOUDEY high #'s press run.

Any thoughts on that ?

TED Z

T206 Reference
.

insidethewrapper · #4 02-01-2019, 06:14 PM

Was Lajoie #106 printed in the same quantities as the 1934 Goudey High #'s (73-96) ? Did any ever show up in 1934 Packs ?

tedzan · #5 02-01-2019, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by insidethewrapper

Was Lajoie #106 printed in the same quantities as the 1934 Goudey High #'s (73-96) ? Did any ever show up in 1934 Packs ?

Mike

Of course, Lajoie printed in the same quantities as the 1934 GOUDEY High #'s (73-96).

However, the Lajoie card was never included in the 1934 GOUDEY packs. The GOUDEY Co. held them, then
dispersed them upon requests from collectors.

So, somewhere there may be stacks and stacks of #106 Lajoie cards which have never seen the light of day.

TED Z

T206 Reference
.

jason.1969 · #6 02-01-2019, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

Mike

Of course, Lajoie printed in the same quantities as the 1934 GOUDEY High #'s (73-96).

However, the Lajoie card was never included in the 1934 GOUDEY packs. The GOUDEY Co. held them, then

dispersed them upon requests from collectors.

So, somewhere there may be stacks and stacks of #106 Lajoie cards which have never seen the light of day.

TED Z

T206 Reference

.

This would actually surprise me very much. I would sooner expect the high series to have principally been on sheets of 24 with the 5x5 layout the exception rather than the rule.

Can you even imagine printing 200,000+ of the 5x5 sheets, only to have to pull the Lajoie 200,000+ times to put in a different pile? This would be a major amount of work!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

tedzan · #7 02-01-2019, 07:18 PM

Let's play the numbers game.....here are some samples from the Hi # series to consider...………

PSA + SGC pop report data:

126.....LaJoie

255.....Cuyler

228.....Camilli

227.....DeShong

208.....Derringer

203.....Mooney

197.....Trosky

196.....Darrow

194.....Werber

185.....Vosmik

These numbers indicate that a fair number of Lajoie cards were mailed out to collectors with respect to cards
collectors pulled from wax-packs.

TED Z

T206 Reference
.

tedzan · #8 02-02-2019, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jason.1969

This would actually surprise me very much. I would sooner expect the high series to have principally been on sheets of 24 with the 5x5 layout the exception rather than the rule.

Can you even imagine printing 200,000+ of the 5x5 sheets, only to have to pull the Lajoie 200,000+ times to put in a different pile? This would be a major amount of work!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

Hi Jason

I originally considered what you are suggesting; so, I don't really differ with you. However, given the fact that all 10 sheets in the 1933 GOUDEY set exist.
And, 4 sheets of the 1934 GOUDEY set exist. I have given up any thoughts of a 5th sheet of which just 24 Hi #s were printed, since it has never surfaced.

I have collected uncut sheets of various sets [GOUDEY's, PLAY BALL's, W514, W560, BOWMAN's (BB & FB 1948-1952), TOPP's (1952-1984), FLEER's (1959
to 1961), etc., etc.] since the 1970's....so, I would have come across such a 24-card Hi # sheet if it was printed.

I cannot find my photos of the first two sheets, but here are the last two printed sheets of the set.

3rd sheet (#49 - 72)

Hi #s series (#73 - 96 + Lajoie)

TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
WTB 1933 Goudey Lajoie	Rhotchkiss	1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	09-23-2018 06:31 PM
WTB 1934 Goudey green Gehrig or 1933 Goudey Lajoie	Tennis13	1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	07-04-2016 03:07 PM
Looking for Advice - 1933 Goudey Nap Lajoie #106	dmking	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	28	11-08-2013 08:54 PM
FS: 1933 Goudey Lajoie	Guttapercha	1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T	9	09-19-2012 04:17 PM
1933 Goudey Lajoie #106	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	18	12-21-2006 10:23 AM