NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

View Poll Results: Which set is better to collect next? (PSA 4 or 5)
1948-49 Leaf 12 19.05%
1952 Topps 30 47.62%
Both are great. Doesn't matter. 21 33.33%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 63. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 09-27-2018, 12:01 PM
tedzan tedzan is offline
Ted Zanidakis
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 7,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
This is funny, because collecting in Illinois in the 70s, everybody called them 1949 cards. We were taught that the card year was the next year after the last year of stats. The cards had 1948 stats, thus 1949 cards. I find it hard to believe that no one in Michigan or Ohio turned the cards over and read the backs.

This was my first 1949 Leaf card. The back reads "Made debut in 1947 as first baseman. Hit .296...chosen 'rookie of the year.' Last season again hit .296..." So as a teenager collecting in the 70s, the card has stats from 1947 and last year 1948, so the card is a 1949 Leaf. I am confused as to why this is so hard. Why would a company write last year in reference to 1948 if they made the cards in 1948?
Hi rats60......thanks for your comments.

I completely agree with your logic. In fact, I have been saying the same as you. However, there are a few on this forum that don't accept it. I guess they just want to be contrarians.
They appear to think that the Grading Companies are infallible; therefore, any fact we provide is ignored by them (or they just don't understand).

As we have said, if collectors read the backs of these 1949 LEAF cards, they will see the player's 1948 stats. Furthermore, no one can argue with the Lou Boudreau and Frank Gustine
bios where events as late as December 1948 are described. Here they are......


MVP in 1948 (announced in mid-December 1948) …... Gustine traded to Cubs on December 8, 1948 .……. "Should sizzle into his old stride this year" (1949)
. .



TED Z

T206 Reference
.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 09-27-2018, 12:39 PM
RedsFan1941 RedsFan1941 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 787
Default

i am not saying that Ted’s theory about the year of issue is incorrect. i am saying he is wrong in placing blame on PSA, SGC, etc.

i know for a fact, because I was there, that 20 years before grading companies existed, collectors and price guides referred to the Leaf set as being issued in 1948. I bet ted knows this too if he was collecting in the 70s.
__________________
R0nnie L3hman
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 09-27-2018, 01:01 PM
tedzan tedzan is offline
Ted Zanidakis
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 7,071
Default

Ronnie

I did collect Sportscards in the 1970's. My first price guide was the Sport Americana BB card Price Guide by Jim Beckett. And, it lists this LEAF BB card set as 1948-1949.
I told Jim (a good friend of mine) that this set was strictly a 1949 issue. Eventually, Jim corrected his Guide to reflect the 1949 date.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 09-27-2018, 01:02 PM
RedsFan1941 RedsFan1941 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 787
Default

just took a quick look through some of my guides from the 1970s. The first edition of the Sport Americana Baseball Card Price Guide, published by Jim Beckett and Denny Eckes in 1979, listed Leafs as being issued in 1948-49.

The second edition of the Sports Collectors Bible, published in 1977, lists 1948 Leafs.

The Stirling Sports Card Catalog, published in 1977, lists 1948-49 Leafs.

I am not saying these guides are right, only that Leafs were referred to as issued in 1948 long before PSA and SGC were on the scene. So to blame the grading companies for this possible mistake, is unfair.
__________________
R0nnie L3hman
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 09-27-2018, 01:06 PM
Lorewalker's Avatar
Lorewalker Lorewalker is offline
Chase
member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 141
Default

I am fascinated by this, Ted, so I have now read the backs of 62 different cards from the Leaf set. To further my earlier point on my previous post, all 62 cards refer to the 1948 season and either list stats or highlight an event of that season. On one of the cards, #66 Orval Grove, which bares a 1948 copyright date, it actually refers to a "winter deal" that brought Early Wynn to the Indians.

I looked up the date of that winter deal and it took place on Dec 14, 1948. There is just no conceivable way that these cards were issued at anytime in 1948. I don't think Vistaprint and Fed Ex were around in 1948 where these cards could have been printed, packed and distributed between Dec 15 and Dec 31.

In case that is not convincing can anyone name a card issue that was released in a particular calendar year in which the stats referenced the season of that same year? It has been the practice of all card companies to release cards in the calendar reflecting the previous season's stats, etc.

This is absolutely not a 1948 issue. It is a 1949 issue and only 1949. I do not know copyright law but there has to be some legal explanation for some cards to bare the 1948 date and why some show 1949. If the presence of the 1948 copyright date is the only factor that determines that this is a 1948 issue then the hobby has the wrong date on this Leaf set.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Grove.jpg (78.2 KB, 43 views)
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 09-27-2018, 01:34 PM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 6,858
Default

The copyright date reflects the year the item was submitted to the Library of Congress, not the date of commercial issue of the set. I can copyright a book today and not offer it for sale until next year.

Beware of errors of inductive reasoning: Reference to an event on a card indicates only that the copy on the card was drafted no earlier than the day after that event, not that it was issued on a specific date after that. For example, referring to a December 8, 1948 trade on a card means that the card bio was written some time after 12/8/48. Saying it was issued in 1949 is an assumption based on the likely date of issue given that bio; not saying it is wrong, just that it is not direct evidence. What if Leaf rolled out the set for Christmas? It would be a 1948 issue.
__________________
Please visit my web site: www.americasgreatboxingcards.com
So... move out of your studio apartment! And try speaking to a real live woman, and GROW THE HELL UP! I mean, it's just baseball cards dammit, IT'S JUST BASEBALL CARDS!
10% off any BIN in my eBay store (user name: exhibitman) for N54 members buying direct from me through this site instead, just PM me.

Last edited by Exhibitman; 09-27-2018 at 01:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 09-27-2018, 01:35 PM
rats60's Avatar
rats60 rats60 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsFan1941 View Post
i am not saying that Ted’s theory about the year of issue is incorrect. i am saying he is wrong in placing blame on PSA, SGC, etc.

i know for a fact, because I was there, that 20 years before grading companies existed, collectors and price guides referred to the Leaf set as being issued in 1948. I bet ted knows this too if he was collecting in the 70s.
Beckett listed it as a 1948-49 set not a 1948 set. The card pictured in the price guide is Joe DiMaggio. The first line of the bio is "Smashed out 39 home runs (tops) and 190 hits for a .320 average last season." Those are his stats from 1948. How is a card a 1948 card when it lists his 1948 sets as being last year?

We are asking common sense questions. How is it placed as a 1948 set when (all?) current players have 1948 stats and several refer to those stats as last year? Who changed the year from 1948-49 and what was the basis for that change? When I collected, it was never referred to as a 1948 set. How is it that kids can read the backs of the cards and figure out they are 1949 cards, but dealers and (serious?) collectors never read the backs of cards and just called them 1948? PSA from the earliest time called them incorrectly 1948, so don't they at least have some responsibility for the error? We all know the power of their flip and with some simple research they could have got it right.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 09-27-2018, 02:13 PM
Lorewalker's Avatar
Lorewalker Lorewalker is offline
Chase
member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 141
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
The copyright date reflects the year the item was submitted to the Library of Congress, not the date of commercial issue of the set. I can copyright a book today and not offer it for sale until next year.

Beware of errors of inductive reasoning: Reference to an event on a card indicates only that the copy on the card was drafted no earlier than the day after that event, not that it was issued on a specific date after that. For example, referring to a December 8, 1948 trade on a card means that the card bio was written some time after 12/8/48. Saying it was issued in 1949 is an assumption based on the likely date of issue given that bio; not saying it is wrong, just that it is not direct evidence. What if Leaf rolled out the set for Christmas? It would be a 1948 issue.
Thanks for the copyright explanation, Adam, so it could certainly be argued that if the copyright date is what is being used to call this a 1948 issue it could be flawed?

Assuming there is no card back that references a New Year's Eve party, a referenced trade that took place on Dec 14th I don't think would in all likelihood give Leaf enough time to print, pack and truck product to the be on the shelves for Christmas. With 11 days until Christmas how many days in advance of Christmas would a company want to get their product on the shelves in front of consumers? Baseball season was long over and football was in mid stride. I guess anything is possible for a company who employed skip numbers on their set but issuing baseball cards in the dead of winter seems like financial suicide.

Chase
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 09-27-2018, 02:20 PM
tedzan tedzan is offline
Ted Zanidakis
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 7,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
The copyright date reflects the year the item was submitted to the Library of Congress, not the date of commercial issue of the set. I can copyright a book today and not offer it for sale until next year.

Beware of errors of inductive reasoning: Reference to an event on a card indicates only that the copy on the card was drafted no earlier than the day after that event, not that it was issued on a specific date after that. For example, referring to a December 8, 1948 trade on a card means that the card bio was written some time after 12/8/48. Saying it was issued in 1949 is an assumption based on the likely date of issue given that bio; not saying it is wrong, just that it is not direct evidence. What if Leaf rolled out the set for Christmas? It would be a 1948 issue.

Hi Adam

Copyright ('48 or '49) has created this dilemma for decades. And, a good part of this is because there aren't too many dudes here as old as I am that remember when we collected
these LEAF BB cards as kids. I have said it in a prior post in this thread. But, I guess I'll have to reprise it again: "I have compared notes with old-timers in the hobby who collected
these cards in their youth. And, absolutely NO ONE recalls purchasing these cards in 1948.

However, some here do not accept this fact. So, I appeal to your common sense of logic....with the dated facts on these player's bios, and Orval Grove's bio (thanks to Lorewalker),
which alludes to the Dec 14, 1948 Grove / Wynn deal....how the hell can anyone think that this set of BB cards was issued in 1948 ? ?


MVP in 1948 (announced in mid-December 1948) …... Gustine traded to Cubs on December 8, 1948 .……. "Should sizzle into his old stride this year" (1949)
. .



TED Z

T206 Reference
.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
1948-49, 1952 topps



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1948 & 1949 LEAF FB cards....show us your LEAF's tedzan Football Cards Forum 29 12-28-2016 05:51 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:44 PM.


ebay GSB