Lots of 1933 Goudey Ruths for sale?

[DeanH3]

I was fortunate enough to acquire both before the big run up. #144 has always been my favorite. Yes, it's the most plentiful of the four. But it's very tough to find with nice qualities. Same goes for the Gehrig. Very tough to find with nice color and registration. Many have a bland look to them. I doubt there will ever be enough supply to satisfy demand for either card.



As for '34 Goudey, I'm more drawn to #61. Interesting to ponder if having no Ruth in the set hurts or helps Gehrig's value. If Ruth was included, I imagine there might be more interest in the set. However, no Ruth means Gehrig is the "key" to the set.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by DeanH3

I was fortunate enough to acquire both before the big run up. #144 has always been my favorite. Yes, it's the most plentiful of the four. But it's very tough to find with nice qualities. Same goes for the Gehrig. Very tough to find with nice color and registration. Many have a bland look to them. I doubt there will ever be enough supply to satisfy demand for either card.



As for '34 Goudey, I'm more drawn to #61. Interesting to ponder if having no Ruth in the set hurts or helps Gehrig's value. If Ruth was included, I imagine there might be more interest in the set. However, no Ruth means Gehrig is the "key" to the set.

WOW and WOW 3 Great Cards and Great Looking Cards

[scmavl]

I let go of my Goudey Ruths and got a 1932 US Caramel instead. They are just so much more scarce and I have always found the image particularly striking, with his hat cocked to the side.

[Jstottlemire1]

Originally Posted by scmavl

I let go of my Goudey Ruths and got a 1932 US Caramel instead. They are just so much more scarce and I have always found the image particularly striking, with his hat cocked to the side.

I think this was a really great move and add back Goudeys in time.

[BabyRuth]

Fillin' my eyes with that double vision.....and blank back to boot!!

[Exhibitman]

Andrew, come on, the 1933 Goudey is by no means a rookie card except for unscrupulous people twisting the definition of rookie card. This is from the PSA master set for Gehrig:

1925 EXHIBITS HENRY L. GEHRIG 10.00
1925-1931 W590 LOU GEHRIG HAND CUT-1ST BASEMAN 3.00
1926 EXHIBITS HENRY L. GEHRIG 1.00
1926 KUT OUTS GIANTS/YANKEES DIE-CUTS LOU GEHRIG 5.00
1926-29 POSTCARD-BACK EXHIBITS LOU GEHRIG BATTING PHOTO 4.00
1926-29 POSTCARD-BACK EXHIBITS LOU GEHRIG BATTING PLAIN 6.00
1926-29 POSTCARD-BACK EXHIBITS LOU GEHRIG PORTRAIT 4.00
1926-1931 EXHIBITS POSTCARD BACK 4-ON-1 GEHRIG/GROVE/DONAHUE/COCHRANE 4.00
1927 EXHIBITS HENRY L. GEHRIG 8.00
1927 W560 LOU GEHRIG 3 OF CLUBS HAND CUT 2.00
1927 W560 HAND CUT LOU GEHRIG 5 OF HEARTS 2.00
1927 YORK CARAMELS TYPE 2 E210 LOU GEHRIG 26 10.00
1928 EXHIBITS LOU GEHRIG 3.00
1928 EXHIBITS LOU GEHRIG POSTCARD BACK 3.00
1928 HARRINGTON'S ICE CREAM LOU GEHRIG 26 8.00
1928 R315 LOU GEHRIG 5.00
1928 SOCIEDADE INDUSTRIAL, ANGOLA SPORTS SERIES BABE RUTH/LOU GEHRIG 100 1.00
1928 SOCIEDADE INDUSTRIAL, ANGOLA SPORTS SERIES BABE RUTH/LOU GEHRIG 116 1.00
1928 SWEETMAN CO. LOU GEHRIG 26 6.00
1928 TABACALERA LA MORENA B.RUTH/L.GEHRIG 116 2.00
1928 THARP'S ICE CREAM LOU GEHRIG 26 5.00
1928 W502 LOU GEHRIG 26 4.00
1928 W502 LOU GEHRIG HAND CUT-BLANK BACK 26 4.00
1928 W565 LOU GEHRIG HAND CUT 1.00
1928 YUENGLING'S ICE CREAM F50 LOU GEHRIG 26 8.00
1929 R316 KASHIN PUBLICATIONS LOU GEHRIG 3.00
1929 R316 5 x 7 PHOTOS LOU GEHRIG 1.50
1929 STAR PLAYER CANDY LOU GEHRIG 32 9.00
1929 W553 LOU GEHRIG HAND CUT 3.00
1929-30 FOUR-ON-ONE EXHIBITS GEHRIG/DUROCHER/KOENIG/RUTH 3.00
1929-1930 ROGERS PEET LOU GEHRIG 28 3.00
1930 BAGUER CHOCOLATE LOU GEHRIG 2.00
1930 CRACKER JACK PINS LOU GEHRIG 1.00
1930 W554 HAND CUT LOU GEHRIG 3.00
1931 W502 LOU GEHRIG HAND CUT 32 4.00
1931 W517 LOU GEHRIG HAND CUT 35 3.00
1931 W517 MINI HAND CUT LOU GEHRIG HAND CUT 4.00
1931-32 FOUR-ON-ONE EXHIBITS GEHRIG/LARY/RUTH/REESE 3.00
1932 U.S. CARAMEL R328 LOU GEHRIG

As for player quality, well, we've kicked that around a lot. Ruth is the GOAT. Tossing aside the years as a pitcher, Ruth amassed 162.7 win share as a position player. Gehrig had 113.7. As for single seasons, Gehrig's best WAR was 1927 11.9. Ruth had three seasons better than that: 1923 14.2, 1921 12.6, and 1927 12.6. Even in his best year, Gehrig was still below Ruth. As for career length, Ruth had 22 seasons BUT Ruth spent his first four years as a pitcher with no more than 67 appearances in his first four years. In his fifth year, 1918, he was basically Ohtani with 95 games played oput of Boston's 126 games that year. Ruth's last year was 28 games: he retired June 2, 1935. So, Ruth had 22 seasons but only 17 that could be considered full seasons as a position player Gehrig had 14 full seasons out of his 17 season career. Ruth is simply the best who ever played the game and card prices reflect it.

As for the assertion that Ruth was a "POS" that doesn't hold water either. Ruth was a party animal and a horn-dog for sure, but by all credible accounts did not have a malicious bone in him. He was decent to fans and kids, for example even when he didn't need to be (he even acknowledged my awe-struck father when he was a kid and saw Ruth on the street in NYC). I'd save POS for crooked players like Hal Chase or Dutch Leonard, racists like Ben Chapman*, or any number of wife-beaters, drug dealers, thieves and pervs (yeah, Trevor Bauer, I'm looking at you).

Don't get me wrong, I love Gehrig. The greatest 1B of all time, a decent human being, and we share a birthday, so I've aways been an admirer.

* "If Chapman disliked Jews, and he did dislike Jews, then he hated "nigras." As the Dodgers-Phillies game began, Chapman's strong, carrying drawl rose from the visiting dugout. "Hey you, there. Snowflake. Yeah, you. You heah me. When did they let you outa the jungle... Hey, we doan need no n*****s here... Hey, black boy. You like white p******g, black boy? You like white p****y? Which one o' the white boys' wives are you f*****g tonight?"

— Roger Kahn, The Era

[jingram058]

And that right there is why they retired 42 for every team. So incredibly much more than silly cardboard cards next to how he handled that assenign BS. If I had been Jackie, I would have clubbed Chapman to death, right there on the field. Imagine how that would have affected matters? And that's why Jack Roosevelt Robinson deserves any and all the focus, attention and accolades bestowed upon him. I wish I could have been around to see him play.

[egri]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

...and we share a birthday, so I've aways been an admirer.

Same year?

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by egri

Same year?

Just my knees.

[Fred]

Basic economical principle of supply/demand. If the Ruth cards are scooped up at the current prices and the supply is gone, then that means demand is high and the price will remain so (and even go higher). If there's a glut of Ruth cards that don't sell, then wouldn't that mean the market is saturated and the price may start dropping until the market value of the cards organically finds a new lower level (bubble popping time).

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Andrew, come on, the 1933 Goudey is by no means a rookie card except for unscrupulous people twisting the definition of rookie card.

Just like the 33 Ruth and 52 Mantle aren’t true rookies but I wasn’t here to argue with Burdick about what was set as what. I mean the guy literally wrote the book so what’s up with the RC designations. It’s never been a secret but no one cares he played in 26’ unless it’s a collector like one of us.

Tell me that Ruth and Gehrig did not have bad blood. We all know that’s bs about Ruth. There’s a reason a man like Gehrig abstained from being associated with him. Great stat info about Ruth but he still played longer. If he was any better they would have played him sooner rather than keeping him a pitcher right? Just don’t think Ruth deserves the attention he gets. Neither do those fools you mentioned in the end of your post.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by T205 GB

Just like the 33 Ruth and 52 Mantle aren’t true rookies but I wasn’t here to argue with Burdick about what was set as what. I mean the guy literally wrote the book so what’s up with the RC designations. It’s never been a secret but no one cares he played in 26’ unless it’s a collector like one of us.

Tell me that Ruth and Gehrig did not have bad blood. We all know that’s bs about Ruth. There’s a reason a man like Gehrig abstained from being associated with him. Great stat info about Ruth but he still played longer. If he was any better they would have played him sooner rather than keeping him a pitcher right? Just don’t think Ruth deserves the attention he gets. Neither do those fools you mentioned in the end of your post.

I don't think Burdick wrote the book on RC designations. Maybe you are thinking of Beckett? And regardless of who (mis)labeled it, we know better now. As for no one caring about 1926: an SGC 3 1926 Exhibit Ruth just sold for $12,600, so I guess someone cares.

Bad blood between Ruth and Gehrig is meaningless. Lots of co-workers don't like each other. So what? It happens. Doesn't make one better than the other.

As for the statistical argument, well, that just ignores the facts. Ruth was a HOF caliber lefty who happened to be so valuable that he set the template for playing both field and pitcher, then was too valuable playing every day to leave as a pitcher and part-time position player.

[DeanH3]

Originally Posted by mrreality68

WOW and WOW 3 Great Cards and Great Looking Cards

Thanks Jeff. So glad I "overpaid" for them at the time. The adage "Today's overpay is tomorrows bargain" rings so true.