![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
View Poll Results: Which card do you believe is the Mantle Rookie card? | |||
1951 Bowman |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
215 | 89.58% |
1952 Topps |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
25 | 10.42% |
Voters: 240. You may not vote on this poll |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
1993 Topps is Jeter's rookie card.
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Holy crap, really, there's a 1951 card of Mickey????
![]() ![]()
__________________
fr3d c0wl3s - always looking for OJs and other 19th century stuff. PM or email me if you have something cool you're looking to find a new home for. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() ![]() In many towns, you might've heard more than a few kids uttering this phrase. Think about it -- back in the early 50's, if you lived in a city or town that only carried Topps cards, you wouldn't even know about Bowman cards. No internet, no collectors conventions, just you and your neighborhood buddies swapping Topps cards and chewing gum. To you and your friends, the '52 Topps Mantle was the Mick's first card, or rookie card (if the term even existed back then). Now, I'm not saying it is corrrect to call the '52 a "rookie card", but some things in a collecting culture just catch on, and sometimes they stick. This is one of those times. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Jay, you beat me to it.... yup no "rookie" cards way back then.
Here's something to ponder... Topps first year for BB cards was 1951. Could you imagine if Mantle was on a blue back Topps in 1951, let's also say it was an SP to boot. I wonder which card would be more desirable, the Topps or the Bowman? Thank goodness Joplin didn't put out a minor league card of the Mick in 1950.... where would we be then? ![]()
__________________
fr3d c0wl3s - always looking for OJs and other 19th century stuff. PM or email me if you have something cool you're looking to find a new home for. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
William Edward White, Moses Fleetwood Walker or Jackie Roosevelt Robinson - who was the first African American major league ball player???
I would say that most of us recognize Jackie as the first, but I'm sure some baseball nerds will point to one of the other two gentlemen. And so just like the above example, I would assume that most people outside our group of baseball nerds would say Mick's 52 Topps is his RC, and we'll all jump up and down and and be technically right that it was his 51 Bowman. So, Jackie or Moses or William White???? 51 Bowman or 52 Topps?? BTW, I voted for the 52 Topps and Jackie is my choice.
__________________
Working Sets: Baseball- T206 SLers - Virginia League (-1) 1952 Topps - low numbers (-1) 1953 Topps (-66) 1954 Bowman (-3) 1964 Topps Giants auto'd (-2) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes, "rookie card" is a hobby invention. But at the time, not an unreasonable one.
And it was around at least a few years before 1980. The reasons they were worth more were The general human obsession with things that are "first" Before the mid-late 70's maybe a touch earlier, most cards were bought by kids. And most kids only collected for 3-4 years. At the time, many players didn't become stars right away. So the chances of having a players first card were fairly slim, and the chances of that card surviving the new hobby/mom cleaning/interest in cars/girls/ move to college .....were poor. Using the 54 Aaron as an example, if you got one, which card went in the spokes? The established star? Favorite player? Local hero? Or that kid in Milwaukee who hit 13 homers? And if 54 was the last year you were into cards, it likely got tossed with the rest of the collection a few years later. So yes, there's a reason rookie cards especially in better condition are worth more. Calling the 52 Mantle a "rookie card" is generally ignorant. I have a hard time taking someone seriously if they call it that. Especially dealers. The 52 Mantle is the most overhyped double printed card of a great but somewhat hyped player in a regional market that thrives on hype. (Any questions how I rate the card? ![]() |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
It's a hobby invention. Dilly dilly!
__________________
Check out my aging Sell/Trade Album on my Profile page HOF Type Collector + Philly A's, E/M/W cards, M101-6, Exhibits, Postcards, 30's Premiums & HOF Photos "Assembling an unfocused collection for nearly 50 years." Last edited by HRBAKER; 11-05-2017 at 01:58 PM. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I AGREE, the term "rookie card" is useless. Why should it be worth anymore than a second year card if the sets were produced equally? This term began being bounced around in about 1980 when the monthly Beckett guides starting coming out.
Strictly a sales pitch and many older collectors will remember there was hype around future Hall of Famer Bob Horner and his "rookie card." Ooops 'rookie card ' |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1962 Topps FS: Mantle, Mantle AS, (2) Rookie Parades and more | autograf | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 12-01-2014 10:22 AM |
One determined bidder........ | Brian Van Horn | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 06-07-2014 06:47 AM |
Mr. X ... was it ever determined who he/she/them were? | Howe’s Hunter | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 01-29-2012 11:13 AM |
'57 Topps Brooks Robinson Rookie, '58 Topps Ted Williams, '68 Topps Mickey Mantle | mcreel | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 3 | 10-24-2011 08:29 AM |
'57 Topps Brooks Robinson Rookie, '58 Topps Ted Williams, '68 Topps Mickey Mantle | mcreel | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 1 | 10-22-2011 08:06 PM |