Share your contrarian hobby opinions

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

The 1952 Topps set is the ugliest set ever made. As kids when we got a Flexichrome card (such as the 1959 Bob Gibson), they looked hideous and we hated them. What could be worse than a whole set of them?

The 1953 Topps set isn't much better. They look like failed High School art projects and many don't even look like the players. I don't know how Topps stayed in business in 1951-1954 with such poor designs compared to Bowman.

1949 Leaf and 1955 Bowman are ugly too. The printing quality was so bad on the Leafs, it is no wonder the 2nd series sold poorly and the rest of the set was never made. The color TVs are ridiculous on the 1955 Bowmans and it doesn't help that you open a pack and the cards are different sizes. It is no wonder that it was Bowman's last set, they clearly were out of good ideas.

For prewar cards, I don't get the fascination with Delongs, Diamond Stars or Cracker Jacks. An oversized player in an undersized stadium? No thanks. The backgrounds on Diamond Stars? Yuck. The only thing worse is all bright red backgrounds of Cracker Jacks.

The 1952 Topps Mantle is the 1951 Bowman Paul Richards of Topps cards. Who thought it would be funny to give Mickey a bright yellow bat? Flexichrome was bad enough, an ugly cartoonish card just made it the worst.

Lou Gehrig, Jackie Robinson, Roberto Clemente and Sandy Koufax cards are under valued. Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron and Ty Cobb cards are way over valued.

The PSA 8 t206 Honus Wagner belongs in a PSA 8 holder. PSA graded sheet cut cards for a long time. I believe Beckett still grades sheet cut cards. In the junk wax era, Topps sold uncut sheets by the pallet to other companies because they did a much better job of cutting them. I would be willing to bet most if not all PSA 10s from this era where cards not cut by Topps. Why do people pick on one card when there are thousands of sheet cut cards in PSA holders with numbers?

Speaking of the t206 Wagner, if a 52 Topps Mantle sells for 7 figures as do a few modern cards, all t206 Wagners should be 8 figures. Also, t206 Planks and 1933 Goudey Lajoies should be worth more than any post war card, as well as several other key prewar cards. Prewar cards and way under valued and postwar cards are way over valued.

Nolan Ryan is one of the greatest pitchers ever. He has one of the lowest FIPs of the live ball era, the lowest H/9 ever and his ERA of 3.19 is solid despite having some pretty bad defenses behind him. He should have won 4 Cy Young awards (1973, 1977, 1981 and 1987). Although his cards are as overrated/overvalued as his on field performance was undervalued.

End the thread. No one can possibly top this outpouring of contrarian views. Fantastic. As to Wagner, the card is both sheet cut and then trimmed again on top of that. Question, if you can forgive the original sheet cut, does the further deliberate trimming matter?

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

End the thread. No one can possibly top this outpouring of contrarian views. Fantastic. As to Wagner, the card is both sheet cut and then trimmed again on top of that. Question, if you can forgive the original sheet cut, does the further deliberate trimming matter?

Some comic collectors probably think the Wagner could be cleaned and pressed into a 9.8

[jsfriedm]

Tinker, Evers, and Chance are more likely legitimately great players who deserve to be in the HOF, rather than marginal players who got in because of a poem. The point of the game is to win, and the 1904-1913 Cubs won more games than any team in history over a decade. The only other HOFer on the team is Brown. The team won with by not only allowing fewer earned runs than anyone else, but fewer unearned runs. So who gets credit for all that winning?

Most of the Boys of Summer are overrated though, partly because of the bandbox they played in, and in Snider's case, because they never threw lefties against the Dodgers (I think Spahn started two games against Brooklyn over a span of several years in the mid-1950s).

The 1960s Giants were the most underachieving team of all time.

[Yoda]

The '51/2 Berk Ross set is undervalued and under appreciated. Despite the cheap look of the cards, they offer an alternative to the high price of '51 Bowmans and '52 Topps. The Mickey, a faux '51 Bowman, Jackie, Joe D., Teddy W. have all shown big price increases in the past 18 mos. And the '51 Musial card is his only national issue for that year.
The set also contains the RC's of Ben Hogan and Bob Cousy.

[brianp-beme]

My hobby goal (for over 15 years) is to correct a long held misconception and make the following statement less of a contrarian view:

The E91 American Caramel sets of cards do not have generic artwork.

The E91A set features facial artwork that was derived from photographs of the player that is designated on the card. About 1/2 of the E91B cards are repeats from the E91A, and thus once again accurate facial depictions. The other 1/2 of the E91B set as well as all of the E91C set do not accurately reflect the player designated, but are still not 'generic', they just have inaccurate player designations on the card.

As a related note, E254 Colgan's Chips cards do have a great portrait photos of players of this era, as was pointed out in a previous post, and many of the photos used in the Colgan set were the basis of the E91 facial artwork.

Brian

[Shemp]

Topps 1959 is a great set.

Topps 1953 Satchel Paige is a horrible looking card.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

End the thread. No one can possibly top this outpouring of contrarian views. Fantastic. As to Wagner, the card is both sheet cut and then trimmed again on top of that. Question, if you can forgive the original sheet cut, does the further deliberate trimming matter?

We know that Mastro admitted trimming the Wagner but I don't buy the speculation that it was cut from a sheet just prior to that by Alan Ray, Bob Sevchuck or anyone else. There would have been multiple examples of Wagner on the sheet and none have surfaced in past the 35+ years to support the speculation.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Pat R

We know that Mastro admitted trimming the Wagner but I don't buy the speculation that it was cut from a sheet just prior to that by Alan Ray, Bob Sevchuck or anyone else. There would have been multiple examples of Wagner on the sheet and none have surfaced in past the 35+ years to support the speculation.

Wasn't there a companion sheet cut Plank? In any case I don't understand anyone to be claiming Ray or Sevchuck had cut it, just that it was in fact sheet cut wherever it originated.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Wasn't there a companion sheet cut Plank? In any case I don't understand anyone to be claiming Ray or Sevchuck had cut it, just that it was in fact sheet cut wherever it originated.

It's speculated that this Plank might have come from the same sheet.

https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=12350

[gonefishin]

Isn't this one of the most horrible cards of Mantle every made? Look how childish he looks!

[Jerry G]

Napolean Lajoie does not appear in the 1933 Goudey set. He does have a card in the 1934 Goudey issue with a peculiar number.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Wasn't there a companion sheet cut Plank? In any case I don't understand anyone to be claiming Ray or Sevchuck had cut it, just that it was in fact sheet cut wherever it originated.

I've seen the claim on numerous occasions it was even in the book The Card.

img839.jpg
img840.jpg

[G1911]

If the Wagner came from uncut material, my presumption would be it wasn’t actually a full sheet and was a strip. A sheet or even a panel of a sheet should have multiple Wagners (and Plank’s, if the Plank came from the same source).

[jingram058]

I gave away a Wagner. It was a fake.

I gave away a 52 Mantle. It also was a fake.

It used to be that the fakes were totally obvious.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I've seen the claim on numerous occasions it was even in the book The Card.

Attachment 521673
Attachment 521674

OK now I recall that from the book. Why are you skeptical?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

OK now I recall that from the book. Why are you skeptical?

Because there would have been several on a sheet and if it was cut from a sheet in 1985 other examples would have surfaced not only by now but a long time ago.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Because there would have been several on a sheet and if it was cut from a sheet in 1985 other examples would have surfaced not only by now but a long time ago.

What then, scrap?

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I've seen the claim on numerous occasions it was even in the book The Card.

Attachment 521673
Attachment 521674

I am far from an expert on the Wagner topic but had heard from numerous people describing the author as a tabloid esque reporter and found many inaccuracies in The Card so I never read it.

[oldjudge]

There is no comparison between the Peck and Snyder Cincinnati trade card and the various c1869 Cincinnati CdVs. The trade card is much, much rarer, especially untrimmed.

[sreader3]

I don’t understand the cult-like fascination with Piedmont 350 examples of the so-called Elite 11 T206 150/350 subjects which were short printed with Piedmont 350. These are common fronts with the most common back. I get that the front/back *combination* is tough but there are many other front/back combinations that are tougher and don’t exact nearly as big of a premium.

Schulte (Front View) with Piedmont 350 excepted. That’s a legit 1-of-1 as far as
I know.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I am far from an expert on the Wagner topic but had heard from numerous people describing the author as a tabloid esque reporter and found many inaccuracies in The Card so I never read it.

I thought little of O'Keefe. Mint Condition by David Jameson is much better.

[JLange]

-The 1978 - 84 Sports Photo Associates Pinbacks, with more than 400 subjects, is one of the great underrated and underappreciated pinback sets of all time.

-Larry Doby's contributions to major league baseball are underappreciated

-There are still many baseball card issues yet to be fully investigated and catalogued.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Wasn't there a companion sheet cut Plank? In any case I don't understand anyone to be claiming Ray or Sevchuck had cut it, just that it was in fact sheet cut wherever it originated.

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I am far from an expert on the Wagner topic but had heard from numerous people describing the author as a tabloid esque reporter and found many inaccuracies in The Card so I never read it.

I wasn't using it as factual information I've already stated I don't believe the Wagner was cut from a sheet in the 1980's by anyone, it was in response to Peters post questioning the claim ever being made.