If only, if only....

almostdone · #1 12-22-2011, 07:50 PM

While thinking about the different sets in the 50's it often frustrates me that this one doesn't have this player or that one doesn't include that player. I know that there were contractual disputed between Bowman and Topps between 52 and 55 leaving key players out of either companies issue of a certain year, but even 56 and on had a few major players missing here or there.

My question is which set in your opinion has the most star power as far as baseball history goes?

I'm not nessesarily talking about astetics or even value but rather which set from the 1950's contains the most available current stars of that specific year.

I think this question should really focus more from 55 back since there were two companies battling it out but 56 Topps has Feller and J. Robinson included so maybe this set should be it.

Let me know your thoughts.

Drew

dougscats · #2 12-23-2011, 08:22 AM

I collect Hall of Famers from all of these sets.

Off the top of my head:
'50-52 Bowman are all missing Satchel Paige;
'51-55 Bowman sets are all missing Jackie Robinson, I think;
Neither Topps nor Bowman ever printed a DiMaggio card; in the '50's only Berk-Ross did, I believe.
'52 Topps I don't think has Williams or Paige,
'53 Topps, Williams, Snider [?],
'54-55 Topps, Mantle.

I hope I'm right about these, and I'm sure I've missed some.
The '56 Topps set may have all the hall of Famers then playing; offhand, I can't think of any that are missing [Correction: Musial is missing].

Edition: '52-56 Topps all missing Musial; '53-55, Reese.

Doug

sycks22 · #3 12-23-2011, 09:12 AM

Musial wasn't in '50 - '51 Bowman. I'd love to see a '52 Topps Teddy or Paige.

dougscats · #4 12-23-2011, 10:27 AM

Come to think of it, is Musial in any of the '52-56 Topps?
I think not.

ALR-bishop · #5 12-23-2011, 10:36 AM

Not. He appeared in a 58 Topps All Star card and made his first regular card appearance in 1959. Then 60 to 63

Volod · #6 12-23-2011, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sycks22

Musial wasn't in '50 - '51 Bowman. I'd love to see a '52 Topps Teddy or Paige.

How about this one?

cdn_collector · #7 12-23-2011, 01:36 PM

The 1953 Topps set would be a great one to collect for star power, except that it's missing Duke Snider [as noted]. 1952 Bowman is a great one, too, but as also noted, no Jackie Robinson. No matter which Bowman or Topps set you choose, you have to give up certain stars in exchange for others.

If you wanna cheat a bit by considering a multi-year issue [or issues], then I think the 1947-66 Exhibit set is just about the best coverage you can get. Every major star covered by Topps between 1952-56 and 1950-55 Bowman that I can think of is in that set. But it's not *really* a 50's issue.

Regards,

Richard.

MilBraves · #8 12-23-2011, 02:43 PM

No Warren Spahn in the 55 Bowmans.

almostdone · #9 12-24-2011, 05:33 AM

In rethinking my original question I really think that overall the 56 Topps set migth have the most overall star power in it.

It contains all of the major current stars such as Mays, Mantle, Williams etc as well as newer big stars like Aaron, Koufax, Clemente, Banks, Killebrew. It has the last regular card of Jackie Robinson as well as Bob Feller. Also all of the other stars from the 50's still playing.

Obviously the only major player missing is Musial but with the fact that there isn't any 50's set that has all current big players in it I think this one might be the most loaded with stars that I can think of.

Any more thoughts?

Drew

Chris Counts · #10 12-25-2011, 03:43 PM

One way to get every player in one year would be to complete the 1954 Topps, 1954 Bowman and 1954 Red Heart Dog Food sets. There's only about 500 cards total, but the rookies in the '54 Topps set will be pricey ...

Gr8Beldini · #11 12-27-2011, 04:29 PM

Without question, 1956 is it. Everybody except Musial. It can't be a classic star power set without Jackie. 1957 is great because of the rookies included but without Jackie (and Feller), it will always be a distant 2nd.

brob28 · #12 12-28-2011, 08:43 PM

I agree, for my money its the 56 Topps set, tons of HOF'ers. The only downside is not any real big rookie cards, but the beauty of the set makes up for it to me.

cdn_collector · #13 12-31-2011, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

One way to get every player in one year would be to complete the 1954 Topps, 1954 Bowman and 1954 Red Heart Dog Food sets. There's only about 500 cards total, but the rookies in the '54 Topps set will be pricey ...

If I had an ounce of focus and a bucket of money, I could be very happy collecting *just* 1954 issues. In addition to Topps & Bowman there are just so many great regional issues. Red Heart, Redman, Dan Dee, NY Journal American, Johnston Cookies...just to name a few.

Regards,

Richard.

mcreel · #14 01-20-2012, 12:45 PM

Drew

I agree with you about the Star power of 56 Topps. However, the 53 Color Bowman has plenty of Star power like Muscial, Reese, Mantle, Musial, Rizzuto, Mathews, Spahn etc.

In my opinion it is the most beautiful set ever made and the best one to put together not only of the 50's sets, but of all sets ever printed. Especially, with only 160 cards.

97manoftroy · #15 01-20-2012, 01:43 PM

I always loved the 55 topps set. The Bright colors on the background are excellent. No mantle card is the killer though.

That being said the 53 Bowman has some of the best looking cards ever produced (IMO) and has the star power. the Pee Wee Reese, Campy, Mantle/Berra/Bauer and Rizzuto/Martin combo cards are top notch and pushes it ahead of the 56 topps by a nose.