Wrong picture on cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Zach

Hey..I don't know if this has been brought up before but has anyone ever relized that Lord in the t208 and d359 set is really Sherry Magee ? Here are some scans that compare the two.

[Archive]

Posted By: BcD

don't think so~

[Archive]

Posted By: Zach

Lord seems to have a very distinct image. Big nose etc.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve Dawson

That was mentioned in an SCD article some time in the last year. I think though, that in the article, it was believed that the Magie card actually bears a reversed picture of Lord.

Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

Heres the problem Zach.Magee never played with the Athletics and the guy on the t204 isnt the same guy on the t208.Harry Lord played with the Red Sox,Bris Lord is the guy pictured on the other card.Youll have to get a scan of his from the t205 or t207 set(The A's player in each set) to accurately compare

[Archive]

Posted By: Glenn

Whaddya think?

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

I think thats Harry Lord again and not Bris whos on the A's in the t207 and t205 set

[Archive]

Posted By: Glenn

My mistake. I thought you were saying it was Bris Lord on the T204.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

To me, there is no question that is Magee pictured on the lord card. Here is his e104-3. Looks spot on to me. The pitcure is just reversed from the t206.



Jay

My place is full of valuable, worthless junk.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Newcomb

and I'm virtually certain it is a picture of Magee-- it looks just like him, and Bris Lord very different. I wondered about the team thing--but I figure the production values on this set are pretty iffy, and they just stuck Magee artwork on Bris' card. It's a curiosity, in any case--

Tim

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I'd love to scan a scan of the back of the card when you get it.

Jay

My place is full of valuable, worthless junk.

[Archive]

Posted By: Zach

Jay-I was gonna post that image but didn't know if you would want it out there seeing how they are unc. That image proves that is is Magee.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Newcomb

Some of you experts riddle me this:

This Lord card was advertised by the seller (going by what SGC had told him) as a D359 Williams with back damage. But if the seller is correct that the damage is not skinning and the card was originally a blank back, why did SGC call it a D359 instead of a blank-back E104-1 with an overprint (as described under E104-1 in the Standard Catalog? Can anyone help with that?

Thanks!

Tim


Here's the auction link:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5215684999&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWN%3AIT&rd=1

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

that's what I was wondering too. That's why I wanted to see a scan of the back.

Jay

My place is full of valuable, worthless junk.