Show us your Rarest card

[GaryPassamonte]

Kevin- Ross Barnes was the the first "superstar" of professional baseball. From 1871-1876, he dominated the game and his omission from the HOF is a travesty.

[oldjudge]

He suffers from the Dave Orr problem--a great career cut short. Not sure how the rule applies to early players, but he does not have the requisite number of playing years required for the HOF. BTW, the first superstar would be Jim Creighton.

[triwak]

Yeah, Barnes probably SHOULD be in the Hall. Pretty much led the National Association in BA for it's entire 5-year run. I believe the HOF still lumps the early pioneers (guys that did not have 10 years in the majors, e.g. Candy Cummings & George Wright) with the executives. The pre-integration vet's committee, obviously.

Speaking of the Wrights, here's another rarity.

[spec]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

Kevin- Ross Barnes was the the first "superstar" of professional baseball. From 1871-1876, he dominated the game and his omission from the HOF is a travesty.

Beyond the brevity of Barnes' career (6 extraordinary seasons over a 9-year span), his Hall of Fame chances have been diminished by the fact that his production decline coincides with the abolishment of the "fair-foul" hit (a bunt that rolled foul after first hitting the ground in fair territory) of which he was a master. In fact, illness robbed him of his exceptional skills, much as it did Hall of Famer Elmer Flick three decades later.

[bigfanNY]

I think this is the only one known I just got it and was shown in Feb Pickups. But I think it deserves the extra exposure a VERY rare Baseball card that was unknown for 94 years and purchased from the estate of original owner.

[old-baseball]

1 of 1 (Best of my knowledge)


1 of 1 (Best of my knowledge)


1 of 2 (Best of my knowledge)


T205 condition / Broadleaf Rarity

[GaryPassamonte]

Jay- First superstar of "professional" baseball.

Spec- The fair-foul rule was available to every player and was the rule of the day. We can only fairly compare players using the rules that were available when they played. The fair-foul argument gets old. Baseball has undergone a ton of rule changes through the years. Apples to apples. Yes, I agree illness was a major factor in Barnes' decline.

The early players whose careers started prior to professional baseball in 1871 should not be held to the "ten year rule" standard. For example, Barnes played 5 years for the Rockford Forest Cities from 1866-1870. The Forest Cities were one of the better teams in the country during those years, yet his service with them counts for nothing. The "pioneer" category was originally intended for players and this should hold true today. There needs to be an avenue created to consider players such as Barnes for HOF induction. Maybe a special committee such as the one that elected a number of Negro League players a few years ago to consider the true baseball "pioneers."

Just a footnote. Look at the career of Sandy Koufax. Barnes career is like Koufax's in reverse. Both were dominant for a 5-6 yaer period.

[buymycards]

This is the only 1917 S328 Weil Zimmerman that is graded, and there aren't any 1916 D329 Hamilton's graded.

[William Todd]

img3806.jpg

img3666.jpg

[spec]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

Jay- First superstar of "professional" baseball.

Spec- The fair-foul rule was available to every player and was the rule of the day. We can only fairly compare players using the rules that were available when they played. The fair-foul argument gets old. Baseball has undergone a ton of rule changes through the years. Apples to apples. Yes, I agree illness was a major factor in Barnes' decline.

The early players whose careers started prior to professional baseball in 1871 should not be held to the "ten year rule" standard. For example, Barnes played 5 years for the Rockford Forest Cities from 1866-1870. The Forest Cities were one of the better teams in the country during those years, yet his service with them counts for nothing. The "pioneer" category was originally intended for players and this should hold true today. There needs to be an avenue created to consider players such as Barnes for HOF induction. Maybe a special committee such as the one that elected a number of Negro League players a few years ago to consider the true baseball "pioneers."

Just a footnote. Look at the career of Sandy Koufax. Barnes career is like Koufax's in reverse. Both were dominant for a 5-6 yaer period.

Gary: I did NOT say I consider Barnes less than Hall of Fame worthy because of his fair-foul prowess. I just pointed out the circumstance for the benefit of readers who might not know that Barnes' credentials have been discounted by many for that reason as well as for his abbreviated career. For the record, I have long advocated for Barnes' election just as I did for 19th century figures such as Frank Selee and Deacon White, who were long overlooked.

[edjs]

I love these cards.

[William Todd]

Bruce, That card is absolutely awesome...