Most Important Baseball Card!

[jchcollins]

In terms of what I personally think is important - the cards of course change with my seasons of life as a collector:

When I finally made the jump from Garbage Pail Kids to baseball cards in 1986, I was 9 years old. The card I wanted most out of the 35 cent 1986 Topps wax packs was Pete Rose - his player card, #1, which was for some reason impossible for me to pull from a pack that year. I had at least two dupes of his manager card. Never did pull one. I eventually got one during my first stint back into the hobby as an adult in my early 20's - I believe. I guess I latched onto Pete that year because he was probably still in the news a lot for having just broken Cobb's record the year before. At any rate, it was before his betting troubles coming to light really began.

When I moved on from current packs to "vintage" (then simply called old cards) when I was probably about 11 years old, the apple of my eye was the '56 Topps Mickey Mantle as soon as I laid eyes on it. I thought, and still largely do - that it's just one of the coolest looking vintage cards ever made. The portrait, the leaping action shot into the crowd, the use of color, the cartoons. Landed this at about age 14 by basically trading my entire vintage collection at the time to a mall shop. Worth it.

Fast forward to present day, I'm 47 - and have been back into the hobby this go-round for right at 10 years now - and I really am not sure what to say is the single most important card for me. As a long time Cubs fan, I had never really zeroed in on Cubs collecting - probably because my childhood collecting predated my real baseball fandom - I just always saw fit to collect everything. I made a large step in correcting the team collecting oversight at this year's National in Cleveland (my first) - by finally acquiring every Cub fan's grail - the '54 Topps Ernie Banks RC. Now I want to go back and complete Topps and Bowman team runs - yes even the super exciting guys like Bob Rush, Hobie Landreth, and George Altman. :-)

Beyond that, I'm feeling a pull into some prewar stuff for the first time really ever. I'd like to get some T210 Old Mill's of local minor league players in NC. And not sure what it would be yet - but I'd like to own an an attractive 19th century card just kind of as a type piece sometime fairly soon. Oh well, for right now the main thing I need to do is save money.

I would agree that "most important" card is hard to define, and likely to many collectors very personal. That's why I told my own story. Thanks!

[Yoda]

N172 Anson in uniform.

[DeanH3]

Originally Posted by BigfootIsReal

Cool, how long have you had that?

Almost 10 years now. Time sure does fly.

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by sb1

In my opinion 1952 Topps Mantle. Everyone knows it and most want it. And, it's a great looking card. The T206 Wagner is unobtainable for most and it's a fugly card, Alfred E. Neuman look alike

It's a nice-looking card, yes, but the guy on it looks nothing like Mantle!

Here, look again and compare:







Shape of the head is wrong ... skin color wrong ... ears are too big ... teeth too big ...

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

It's a nice-looking card, yes, but the guy on it looks nothing like Mantle!

Here, look again and compare:







Shape of the head is wrong ... skin color wrong ... ears are too big ... teeth too big ...

I’d agree. Judged on the aesthetics alone and not what we know of the card - I don’t think it looks fantastic. But of course it’s iconic, and has been for a long time, so most of that is just out the window at this point.

The ‘68 Topps Ryan / Koosman is another example of a card like that. I won’t call it downright ugly, but it’s certainly not the prettiest card ever made. But it’s become an icon unto itself, so nobody really cares.

The one card you actually hear this subject discussed around a lot is the ‘63 Rose. Arguably the ugliest pricey card ever made…


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

Not on top of the mountain like the T206 Wagner and '52 Topps Mantle clearly are, nor as valuable...but I'd submit that this card is quite important also...

This should be the clear choice

EDIT: The pic didn't quote for some reason. It's the 1949 Leaf Jackie Robinson.

[bbcard1]

Let me make a pitch for this guy...the 1939 Playballs was the first substantial baseball offering made by Warren Bowman and the Williams rookie was the most significant card in that set. After the war, he rebranded his Gum, Inc to become Bowman and demonstrated that baseball cards were viable product. There is still a small part of the company's DNA in modern Topps and Bowman offerings. I get that this is a somewhat contrarian view, but seemed worth pondering.

[CW]

Thinking a bit outside the box here, but...

the most important card is the one that got you interested in collecting cards.

[vintagerookies51]

Important for American history? I'd vote the Bond Bread Jackie portrait. Outside of that I'd be torn between T206 Wags and 52T Mantle. One is extremely rare and expensive and makes the news every time one gets sold, while one is the realistic grail card for many collectors.

[JollyElm]

If you had to rank your cards in an orderly stack of "Easiest to sell or trade" to
"Wouldn't sell or trade it even if a loved one's life was hanging in the balance,"
then that card at the bottom is the most important card.

[Tomi]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

It's a nice-looking card, yes, but the guy on it looks nothing like Mantle!

Here, look again and compare:







Shape of the head is wrong ... skin color wrong ... ears are too big ... teeth too big ...

Looks pretty close when you use the original photo it was made from.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

In terms of what I personally think is important - the cards of course change with my seasons of life as a collector:

When I finally made the jump from Garbage Pail Kids to baseball cards in 1986, I was 9 years old. The card I wanted most out of the 35 cent 1986 Topps wax packs was Pete Rose - his player card, #1, which was for some reason impossible for me to pull from a pack that year. I had at least two dupes of his manager card. Never did pull one. I eventually got one during my first stint back into the hobby as an adult in my early 20's - I believe. I guess I latched onto Pete that year because he was probably still in the news a lot for having just broken Cobb's record the year before. At any rate, it was before his betting troubles coming to light really began.

When I moved on from current packs to "vintage" (then simply called old cards) when I was probably about 11 years old, the apple of my eye was the '56 Topps Mickey Mantle as soon as I laid eyes on it. I thought, and still largely do - that it's just one of the coolest looking vintage cards ever made. The portrait, the leaping action shot into the crowd, the use of color, the cartoons. Landed this at about age 14 by basically trading my entire vintage collection at the time to a mall shop. Worth it.

Fast forward to present day, I'm 47 - and have been back into the hobby this go-round for right at 10 years now - and I really am not sure what to say is the single most important card for me. As a long time Cubs fan, I had never really zeroed in on Cubs collecting - probably because my childhood collecting predated my real baseball fandom - I just always saw fit to collect everything. I made a large step in correcting the team collecting oversight at this year's National in Cleveland (my first) - by finally acquiring every Cub fan's grail - the '54 Topps Ernie Banks RC. Now I want to go back and complete Topps and Bowman team runs - yes even the super exciting guys like Bob Rush, Hobie Landreth, and George Altman. :-)

Beyond that, I'm feeling a pull into some prewar stuff for the first time really ever. I'd like to get some T210 Old Mill's of local minor league players in NC. And not sure what it would be yet - but I'd like to own an an attractive 19th century card just kind of as a type piece sometime fairly soon. Oh well, for right now the main thing I need to do is save money.

I would agree that "most important" card is hard to define, and likely to many collectors very personal. That's why I told my own story.

Good story! And I agree that each collector may have his own personal most 'important" card.

That of course prompted me to try to select my own personal most important card. So of course I then asked myself which stars I like the most which is a tough question right there. Then which stars have the most attractive poses in some of my favourite sets, e.g. Topps 1959, 1960, 1963, 1954 and 1958. But then again I didn't actually buy and collect any Baseball cards pre-1962 at the time (though I acquired a few later) so I can't say I remember certain specific cards from those pre-1962 sets. Therefore the pull of nostalgia for any particular card from those earlier years just isn't there.

So when I then asked myself which one specific Baseball card I remember the most clearly from my early pack buying days, it's the #1 card from the 1962 set:

(Not mine.)

Though I didn't really like that Roger Maris card at the time since I was a Yankee hater, it's definitely the Baseball card I most clearly remember from my formative years. It also had a cameo in a Star Trek episode where Mr. Spock described it as "priceless".

Moreover since then I've read accounts of how many Yankee fans were hostile to Maris since he was threatening to break the record of their idol Babe Ruth. They thought if anybody broke Ruth's record, it should be their anointed dauphin Mickey Mantle. This put incredible mental strain on Roger Maris in that 1961 season. I've sympathized with Maris ever since I read those accounts.

And then to add insult to injury, Topps added a subset of Babe Ruth cards to the 1962 set! Even if I acquire the rest of the 1962 set, I'll pass on the Babe Ruth cards and leave those spots in my binder sheets empty.

[Leon]

For me, this is the quintessential baseball card. So, in that respect, it's important to me.

[MVSNYC]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

This should be the clear choice.

Thanks, agreed. (This was in regards to Jackie’s 1948 Leaf Rookie that I posted).

BTW, there’s several nice examples in the Fall REA sale opening later today.

Leon- stunning Ruth!

[Jstottlemire1]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

Not on top of the mountain like the T206 Wagner and '52 Topps Mantle clearly are, nor as valuable...but I'd submit that this card is quite important also...

Love it and tough call but I believe it's up there as well with the aforementioned.

[OhioLawyerF5]

The most important baseball card is the next one I need to fill a hole in my PC.

[BRoberts]

Got to be the Morehouse Baking Babe Ruth.

[BigfootIsReal]

Originally Posted by BRoberts

Got to be the Morehouse Baking Babe Ruth.

Isn't the Morehouse a regional release, not widely distributed?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by BigfootIsReal

Isn't the Morehouse a regional release, not widely distributed?

Still.

[BigfootIsReal]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Still.

What I'm getting at is if the Morehouse was available in a very limited area and is considered a "Rookie", why is there such a large argument about the Bond Bread Jackie NOT being his "Rookie" since it wasn't widely available?

If this has been hashed over already, then people don't need to reply and can tell me to F-off

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by BigfootIsReal

What I'm getting at is if the Morehouse was available in a very limited area and is considered a "Rookie", why is there such a large argument about the Bond Bread Jackie NOT being his "Rookie" since it wasn't widely available?

If this has been hashed over already, then people don't need to reply and can tell me to F-off

To me, the Bond Bread portrait is his “rookie” card.

[todeen]

I'm going to posit a position for ultra modern cards, and in the moment right now, and say Pokemon 1st Series. I've never collected them. But everyone says that local shows are 50% Pokemon. It seems they are a gateway drug to the larger collecting universe.

If I had to pick a baseball card right now, at this moment, I'd say 1952 Jackie Robinson. Bond Bread is nice, but I think more people could pick out the 52 Jackie. COVID saw crazy price surges, but the Negro Leagues stars seemed to benefit more than other (percentage wise). I've said for years -- since the Jackie movie debuted -- that more of my high school students talk about Jackie Robinson than any other baseball player. Shohei Ohtani is maybe now tied for public awareness, but I think kids would say Jackie is more important.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by todeen

I'm going to posit a position for ultra modern cards, and in the moment right now, and say Pokemon 1st Series. I've never collected them. But everyone says that local shows are 50% Pokemon. It seems they are a gateway drug to the larger collecting universe.

If a youngster was ten years old in 1999 when Pokemon cards debuted in the United States, that youngster is now at the age of 35 looking back fondly at the items that he treasured and coveted during his formative years.