New York Times Leaf Article

[Peter_Spaeth]

Other than Musial, whose 48B would now be his only RC, and Paige, whose 49B would now take on RC status, what RC designations would this affect? I concur it should not affect Jackie because the BB is his true RC. There are already all sorts of 49B that are RCs of players who are not in Leaf -- Hodges, Ashburn, Wynn, Roberts, Lemon, Snider, Kell, Campanella.

[packs]

I think even Musial depends on whether you consider his Montiel card his true rookie or not. It predates all 1948 issues too.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

I think even Musial depends on whether you consider his Montiel card his true rookie or not. It predates all 1948 issues too.

He's also in 1947 Homogenized BB, but I don't think most people would go there either.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by packs

I think even Musial depends on whether you consider his Montiel card his true rookie or not. It predates all 1948 issues too.

Agree. If you consider Jackie's true rookie to be the 47BB, then logically the Montiel must be Musial's rookie card (or at least supersedes the 48B for rookie card status).

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bk400

Agree. If you consider Jackie's true rookie to be the 47BB, then logically the Montiel must be Musial's rookie card (or at least supersedes the 48B for rookie card status).

Logically we could distinguish a US baseball issue from a Cuban multisport issue, no?

[packs]

Usually I would agree but the Montiel is a tough one. Musial appears in his Cardinals uniform and his career up to date with the Cardinals is featured in his bio on the back. The issue is also referred to as 1946-47 which would I think challenge any other issue.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

Usually I would agree but the Montiel is a tough one. Musial appears in his Cardinals uniform and his career up to date with the Cardinals is featured in his bio on the back. The issue is also referred to as 1946-47 which would I think challenge any other issue.

When did he wear #19?

[BioCRN]

There are no winners in a regional issue vs national issue RC debate.

Then there's "Do exhibits count?" and "Do card game cards count?"...etc

It ends with more RC's than people thought possible once everyone has stated their side.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

When did he wear #19?

No idea. DiMaggio is wearing number 18 on the Hank Erickson National Chicle.

This write up on Musial's 1941 debut features the original photo used for the Montiel card. Looks like a Cardinals uniform to me:

https://sabr.org/gamesproj/game/sept...-league-debut/

From the photo credit on the web page: Stan Musial — pictured wearing a number 19 jersey during spring training 1942 in St. Petersburg, Florida — hit .426 in 12 games as a rookie call-up in September 1941. (National Baseball Hall of Fame Library)

So the Montiel features a photo of Musial from spring training 1942. I would say that's another plus for that card.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by packs

I think even Musial depends on whether you consider his Montiel card his true rookie or not. It predates all 1948 issues too.

Certainly it predates the others, but doesn't something have to be a card to be a rookie card? The Montiels are just paperstock cutouts that otherwise look like baseball cards.

[Pat R]

So what baseball card did Ken Keltner show to the bartender?

December 24 Wisconsin newspaper
1948 Ken Keltner Baseball card The_Post_Crescent_1948_12_24_21.jpg

[packs]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

Certainly it predates the others, but doesn't something have to be a card to be a rookie card? The Montiels are just paperstock cutouts that otherwise look like baseball cards.

I’ve never heard of anyone refer to the Montiel Desportes set as being hand cut. They have received number grades for as long as I’ve been familiar with them.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by packs

I’ve never heard of anyone refer to the Montiel Desportes set as being hand cut. They have received number grades for as long as I’ve been familiar with them.

I don't know if they were cut by hand or not. My point was merely that they aren't cards.

[packs]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I don't know if they were cut by hand or not. My point was merely that they aren't cards.

Then what are they? Cards can be made of a material other than standard Topps cardboard and be a card.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by packs

Then what are they? Cards can be made of a material other than standard Topps cardboard and be a card.

I am aware that there are different card stocks, but the Montiels are not printed on any of them. The paper they are printed on is newsprint, so you can call them sports images or whatever you like, but if you try to hold one level (horizontal) from the corner you'll find that they are decidedly not any sort of card. They'll just flop over, the same as any sheet of newspaper would, because that is how the material behaves. I don't expect we'll ever all agree on the minimum or maximum length or width for a baseball card, but I think we can at least agree that it needs to be a card.

[packs]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I don't know if they were cut by hand or not. My point was merely that they aren't cards.

Then what are they? Cards can be made of a material other than standard Topps cardboard and be a card.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Other than Musial, whose 48B would now be his only RC, and Paige, whose 49B would now take on RC status, what RC designations would this affect? I concur it should not affect Jackie because the BB is his true RC. There are already all sorts of 49B that are RCs of players who are not in Leaf -- Hodges, Ashburn, Wynn, Roberts, Lemon, Snider, Kell, Campanella.

1949 Leaf Spahn and Kiner are not rookie cards. PSA designates players with both 49 Leaf and Bowman as having two rookie cards, so no change there.

[BioCRN]

Originally Posted by rats60

1949 Leaf Spahn and Kiner are not rookie cards.

Many people will point to 1948 Bowman for both of them...some will point to 1947 Tip-Top Bread for both of them...

Grover C Alexander...his RC depends on whether you count supplements, leathers, silks, transfers/stamps, or table game cards that came before his 1914 Cracker Jack card many say is his RC.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

Many people will point to 1948 Bowman for both of them...some will point to 1947 Tip-Top Bread for both of them...

Grover C Alexander...his RC depends on whether you count supplements, leathers, silks, transfers/stamps, or table game cards that came before his 1914 Cracker Jack card many say is his RC.

I was of the notion for a long time that Alexander's rookie card, being issued in 1914, but now have to go with the '14 CJ CJ, as that seems to be the common belief. Shame there aren't more cards of 'Ole Pete', given his significance to the game.

[Yoda]

Sorry, meant to reference the T222 Fatima card.

[samosa4u]

I don't like the 47' Bond Bread set because they are all Jackies! Are they all rookie cards? Furthermore, imagine if Mantle had thirteen different cards in the 52' Topps set!! Would they be sought-after and worth so much ?? Probably not, because having that many cards would just water down the values.

We also have to look at brand loyality here. People love Nike, Adidas, Reebok, etc. and it's no different with sports cards. People want Leaf, Bowman, Topps, O-Pee-Chee, Upper Deck, etc. How many fans are there of Bond Bread ?? What else did they make other than that Jackie set ??

[packs]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

I don't like the 47' Bond Bread set because they are all Jackies! Are they all rookie cards? Furthermore, imagine if Mantle had thirteen different cards in the 52' Topps set!! Would they be sought-after and worth so much ?? Probably not, because having that many cards would just water down the values.

We also have to look at brand loyality here. People love Nike, Adidas, Reebok, etc. and it's no different with sports cards. People want Leaf, Bowman, Topps, O-Pee-Chee, Upper Deck, etc. How many fans are there of Bond Bread ?? What else did they make other than that Jackie set ??

They made an entire set of cards other than Jackie.

The Jackie Portrait card was produced specifically to promote Jackie because of his historic achievement, as was the rest of the set that followed. Why would any Jackie fan prefer another card to the portrait? The portrait is the first appearance of any black player in a major league uniform.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

I don't like the 47' Bond Bread set because they are all Jackies! Are they all rookie cards? Furthermore, imagine if Mantle had thirteen different cards in the 52' Topps set!! Would they be sought-after and worth so much ?? Probably not, because having that many cards would just water down the values.

We also have to look at brand loyality here. People love Nike, Adidas, Reebok, etc. and it's no different with sports cards. People want Leaf, Bowman, Topps, O-Pee-Chee, Upper Deck, etc. How many fans are there of Bond Bread ?? What else did they make other than that Jackie set ??

But all that said, the Portrait commands very strong prices.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

I don't like the 47' Bond Bread set because they are all Jackies! Are they all rookie cards? Furthermore, imagine if Mantle had thirteen different cards in the 52' Topps set!! Would they be sought-after and worth so much ?? Probably not, because having that many cards would just water down the values.

We also have to look at brand loyality here. People love Nike, Adidas, Reebok, etc. and it's no different with sports cards. People want Leaf, Bowman, Topps, O-Pee-Chee, Upper Deck, etc. How many fans are there of Bond Bread ?? What else did they make other than that Jackie set ??

Since we know some of the photos were taken in 1948 or 1949, I think we can rule out those Jackie Bond Bread cards from rookie card contention. Whether any of the ones issued in 1947, or merely the earliest one, should be considered a rookie card is a separate issue, but I'm inclined to say anything that came out before the end of the 1947 season deserves the label.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Yoda

Sorry, meant to reference the T222 Fatima card.

Of course the M101-2 is even earlier, but I prefer the Fatima.

[BioCRN]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Of course the M101-2 is even earlier, but I prefer the Fatima.

Poking around, it seems Grover Alexander's RC status was discussed on Net54 in a past poll 12 years ago...with an expected all-over-the-place landing point.

https://www.net54baseball.com/poll.p...lts&pollid=123

Thread: https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=151396