Defining pre-war rookie cards! Ahhh.....

[rman444]

Originally Posted by DanP

I just noticed the thread from last winter (I was busy in 2010 and didn't do much with N54 or collecting) from Kevin regarding his research about why the 1907-09 Novelty Cutlery were really issued in 1910 or 1911. What??? Just a few days ago I just missed out on Speaker's NC at $2k!! I would have been in even more shock if I just realized that I spent $2k on a card that maxed out at $763 in the ebay auction (seller had a reserve) was not a better RC than what I already have!!

Dan

Actually, I don't think Kevin's research proved that the set was not produced from 1907-1909. I think what he showed was that 6 of the 26 cards in the set could not have been produced before 1909.

Since that actually falls within the historically accepted production dates of 1907-09, I'm not sure how that changes anything.

[familytoad]

Guys,
Although Dan thought otherwise, I does appear that we don't mind talking about RC designations every now and then.

I may have written cryptically in my earlier post...I guess I simply meant, which HOF players would you consider as having RC's in T206.

So I think we have nominations for Wheat, Speaker, W. Johnson and Marquard...interesting group.

I also find it interesting that no HOFer debuted in T205.

Now, back to telling us more about the W600's.........

[Matt]

Originally Posted by rman444

Actually, I don't think Kevin's research proved that the set was not produced from 1907-1909. I think what he showed was that 6 of the 26 cards in the set could not have been produced before 1909.

Since that actually falls within the historically accepted production dates of 1907-09, I'm not sure how that changes anything.

When dating sets, we always assume they were produced at 1 time, unless we have proof to the contrary. The original 1907-1909 designation for the NC PCs was due to previous folks not being able to narrow the date; Kevin showed that 1907 or 1908 were not possible. Otherwise, you could claim a wide time frame for any issue - e.g. prove to me the E102 issue wasn't produced over many years from 1908-1912?

[Baseball Rarities]

Originally Posted by Matt

When dating sets, we always assume they were produced at 1 time, unless we have proof to the contrary. The original 1907-1909 designation for the NC PCs was due to previous folks not being able to narrow the date; Kevin showed that 1907 or 1908 were not possible. Otherwise, you could claim a wide time frame for any issue - e.g. prove to me the E102 issue wasn't produced over many years from 1908-1912?

I have received requests by a couple of collectors for my thoughts on the dating of the Novelty Cutlery postcards (which I feel is 1910) so I decided to post them here.

The 1982 Sport Americana Baseball Memorabilia and Autograph Price Guide by Jim Beckett and Denny Eckes list both the PC796 Sepia Postcard set and the Novelty Cutlery Postcard set as being from 1910. The PC796 checklist shows 25 players, including Sam Frock. The description of the 1910 Novelty Cutlery set notes that the pictures and subjects of the set are the exact same as the PC796 set except that the images were cropped smaller to fit within the more ornate borders of the Novelty Cutlery cards. For some reason, Beckett did not include these issues in their normal yearly Price Guides and many, if not most, baseball card collectors are not even aware that they were checklisted in this book.

The 1975 edition of The Sports Collectors Bible by Bert Sugar lists the PC796 Sepia Postcard as being from c. 1910. It does not include a checklist. It did not have an entry for the Novelty Cutlery set. Same thing for the 1977 edition. It was not until the 1979 edition that the Novelty Cutlery set was included. The Sports Collectors Bible gave the Novelty Cutlery set the designation PC805 and dated it as being from 1907. They make no comment as the set being related (or in this case identical) to the PC796 Sepia set. This is ironic because the book cross-referenced many other sets, such as the M101-5 and M101-4 sets with the different sets that shared their images.

It should also be noted that the Bible listed the checklist for the Novelty Cutlery set (they did not for the PC796 set) and misspelled the name of "Frock" as "Flock." Obviously, this is where all of the different checklists came up with the name "Flick" which they felt was just "Flock" misspelled.

Over the years, the 1907 date and the name "Flock" has been used by different price guides. Obviously, these price guides cannot do extensive research on every set that they include and instead use whatever public information that they can get their hands on. Unfortunately, when a mistake is made (1907 dating and "Flick") is it copied as well.

Even today, the 2011 Standard Catalog of Baseball Cards by Bob Lemke has 26 subjects in the Novelty Cutlery set with both Flick and Frock included, but only 25 subjects in the PC796 set, with only Frock. They use the correct 1910 date for the PC796 set, but still use the 1907 date for the Novelty Cutlery set, though they now call it "1907-1909" so that the players who could not possibly have had a card in 1907 or 1908 can be explained.

My feeling is that the Bible erroneously came up with the 1907 date and was not even aware that the set mirrored the existing 1910 PC796 set. I think that both sets date from 1910. In addition to the info that I originally posted here,

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=128350

there are other clues that lead me to believe this:

Some are common sense - why would Speaker have been included in a 1907 or 1908 set? He was a full time minor league player at the time. He only played in 38 major league games during those two years and barely managed a .200 average. Would it not have made more sense for the set to have been produced in 1910 after his breakout rookie campaign of 1909?

Second, I have never seen a Novelty Cutlery Postcard with a postmark before 1911, let alone 1907, 1908 or 1909. I have seen two PC796 postcards with postmarks of 1910. Who knows, maybe Novelty Cutlery used the images in the PC796 set and did not produce the set until 1911.

Also, how can the card of Cobb and Wagner (not my card) be explained? I assume that the picture used was taken during the 1909 World Series. If so, then the earliest that this photo could have been taken was October 8, 1909. I doubt that they could not have produced a postcard with this image until 1910 as these were not Real Photo Postcards.

Any other thoughts or viewpoints would be appreciated.

[DanP]

Kevin, tremendous research!! Thanks.
Now, can you solve the question regarding the 1916-20 W-UNC Strip Cards? I spent a few hours one night trying to prove they weren't from 1916. I'll have to look back through the N54 archives.

Thanks,
Dan

[DanP]

Would we all agree that if a player's first card was in both the 48 Bowman and the 48 Leaf set that their 48 Bowman is their true RC since the 48 Leaf cards are now believed to have been issued in 1949?

Dan

[ls7plus]

Unless its Spahn, Berra or Kiner, all of whom at least appeared in the 1947 Tip Top Bread set.

Larry

[DanP]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Unless its Spahn, Berra or Kiner, all of whom at least appeared in the 1947 Tip Top Bread set.

Larry

Correct, my statement only applied to players who has their first card in 1948.

Thanks,
Dan

[Matt]

Originally Posted by DanP

Kevin, tremendous research!! Thanks.
Now, can you solve the question regarding the 1916-20 W-UNC Strip Cards? I spent a few hours one night trying to prove they weren't from 1916. I'll have to look back through the N54 archives.

Thanks,
Dan

Dan - you can check the archives, they're definitely not 1916 and almost certainly not 1917 either; most likely a 1919 issue, but 1918-1921 is the range of reasonable issue dates for the big heads.