Seaver RC vs Ryan RC

[Kutcher55]

Originally Posted by G1911

This is pretty normal. The Ryan is one of the most highly printed cards of the decade, the Seaver one of the least. When total population is low and demand high, it pushes the price between poor and mint closer than it is when there’s enough to go around and the set builders can just take the low grade ones without much scarcity. The Ryan is popular and iconic, but there’s one out there for every single vintage collector.

That makes total sense. It’s interesting just how much this impacts the low grade market for these cards.

[brian1961]

I'd like to chime in on this matter. I was a 13-year-old collector in 1967, trying with all my might to complete the big Topps set. Based upon what I did in 1966, I knew what I would have to do.

Late in the summer of '66, every outlet seemed to have turned to football cards. My Chicago suburb only had one convenience shop carry the 7th series, and by the time I discovered it, there was just one wax pack left! At this time, I was ordering cards from The Trading Card Company, located in Farmington Hills, Michigan. I ordered the 1966 7th series from them, for a very nominal price. Beautiful condition. This purchase completed my '66 Topps.

So here it was 1967. Football was getting a lot more popular after the first SUPER BOWL, and the card-selling outlets seemed to stock them even earlier. I did not bother even looking for the 1967 7th Series baseball; I once again ordered them from The Trading Card Company. Same result---gorgeous cards---completed my 1967 set. Nestled among the last series was Tom Seaver! I had wanted him for several months. Early in May, Tom's picture appeared on the front of THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE sports section, just as he was about to deliver a flaming fastball. I thought to myself, "wow, that guy looks good!" Of course, Topps was doing their lousy-looking duo-player rookie cards; ugh, I hated how they looked. Be that as it may, that duo card was Tom Seaver's Topps rookie card. I was half a century away from discovering the New York Mets made a small postcard set of their team, including a drop-jaw gorgeous beauty of Tom Terrific! I finally got that baby this year; it's the proverbial 100 times better-looking than his sardine Topps.

Back to the OP. None of my friends got the 1967 Topps 7th Series baseball but me. Compared to the plethora of 1968 Topps 2nd Series with Nolan Ryan, offered early in the season by the millions, the 1967 Topps 7th Series is a rarity. I remember well getting at least doubles of the Ryan rookie back in '68. Not that I noticed much, since he was a nobody at that time.

That's what I remember as a teen collector back in the day. Take it for what it is.

--- Brian Powell

[rats60]

To echo the above. My brother and I both completed the 1968 Topps sets and between us we had a dozen Ryan RCs. We both had 1967 complete up through series 6, but had few high numbers and 0 Seaver RCs. When I got my first job, the first thing I did was order 2 complete 7th series sets from The Card Collectors Co. My brother's Christmas present that year was one of those runs of mint high numbers to complete his set.

In my opinion, the 1967 Topps Seaver is one of the most underpriced cards in the hobby. Irregardless of how good Seaver was and if Ryan is overrated or not, the scarcity of the Seaver should make it more expensive than the Ryan RC. They were both outstanding pitchers.

I think the disparity in pricing for lower grade copies is also due to the lack of distribution of 1967 high series. Many areas didn't even get them. Most of the supply came into the hobby through mail order dealers selling to collectors who took care of their cards. The Ryan being more available to the general public, put lots of copies into hands of kids who played with their cards, flipped them, put them in bike spokes, etc.