Rizzuto & Slaughter "Real" RC Debate

[Robextend]

A thread on the BST got me wondering what issue the true RCs of Phil Rizzuto and Enos Slaughter are from. SGC recognizes them as 1948 Bowman, however as we all know they are also both featured in the 1941 Double Play series. As a Post-War HOF RC collector, I would be interested to see what the majority thinks. I am not sure if it is obvious, or if there is a debate.

Would love to hear your thoughts.

Thanks - Rob

[DanP]

Originally Posted by Robextend

A thread on the BST got me wondering what issue the true RCs of Phil Rizzuto and Enos Slaughter are from. SGC recognizes them as 1948 Bowman, however as we all know they are also both featured in the 1941 Double Play series. As a Post-War HOF RC collector, I would be interested to see what the majority thinks. I am not sure if it is obvious, or if there is a debate.

Would love to hear your thoughts.

Thanks - Rob

For me there's no debate:
RC for both -- 1941 Double Play (I believe was issued in Mass)
next 1947 Bread cards

1st Mainstream RC - 1948 Bowman

I believe a lot of post-war RC collectors go after the 1st mainstream card issued which I believe would be the Bowman.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a few more:
Frank Robinson --> 56 Kahn's or 57 Topps

Stan Musial --> 46-47 Prop Montiel or 47 Bond Bread or 48 Bowman or 48-49 Leaf
Although I'd accept all 4 as RC's the 46-47 card does not show Musial in a MLB uniform. I believe it's a Cuban league card or something.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Rizzuto & Slaughter - Definitely Double Plays along with Lou Boudreau

[novakjr]

For some reason even Beckett and, I believe, the SCD also list the '48 as RC's for Rizzuto and Slaughter. Beckett also designates the '41 Double Plays as XRC's...That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I'm pretty sure the Double Plays were a mainstream release, were available in packs, and are legitimately cards. I know the Double Plays were produced in Mass., but I believe were more widely released. I believe Beckett also credits the '48 Bowman as Feller's rookie. C'mon now. That's just not right..

Either way it breaks down, when it comes to my HOF Rookie collection, I just wouldn't be satisfied with the '48's of either, while knowing that they had widely available cards that were issued in pack form 7 years earlier.

It's one thing to overlook the Bond Breads, or some other somewhat obscure regional/local team set or food giveaway, to credit a national release that is maybe a year or two later. But to give away 7 years on a set that seemingly meets all typical standards, doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

To each their own though.

[Robextend]

Dan/Phil/David

Thanks for the responses, and I agree on all accounts. Pretty much just wanted to confirm what I always thought.

Rob

[con40]

No doubt it's the '41 Double Play for both. That was a mainstream issue, albeit not the most attractive.

In fact, Slaughter shares his card with Johnny Mize, making it a double RC for both if I'm not wrong.

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by con40

No doubt it's the '41 Double Play for both. That was a mainstream issue, albeit not the most attractive.

In fact, Slaughter shares his card with Johnny Mize, making it a double RC for both if I'm not wrong.

Mize also has a card with Lithweiler(this is the one I have). Personally, I consider it Mize's RC as well. Everything earlier was a little sketchy to technically consider a card..I'd be happy to have any of them as his rookie card in my collection though.

Reese also has a RC in the DP set, and possibly Joe Gordon(depending on perspective).

[bcbgcbrcb]

Mize appears in the 1936 R312 set, which were considered premiums and are somewhat larger than standard size cards. Again depends on your definition of a "card". Good point on the Reese. Gordon appears on an R309 from 1939, again considered a premium and a little larger than a standard size card.

[Griffins]

Slaughter also appears in the '41 Cards team issue set

[CharleyBrown]

Would love to add the Musial Propagandas Montiel card to my P/C.

[GasHouseGang]

Reese also appears in the 1941 Playball set.

[fkw]

Ive always thought the knock on the R330 Double Play cards is the fact that they have 2 players per card..... some dont consider the multi player and team cards a rookie card (so what is the 1968T Ryan then?).

Slaughter,........ Id rank that 1941 W754 just above the R330
Rizzuto R330
Mize R312

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by fkw

Ive always thought the knock on the R330 Double Play cards is the fact that they have 2 players per card..... some dont consider the multi player and team cards a rookie card (so what is the 1968T Ryan then?).

Slaughter,........ Id rank that 1941 W754 just above the R330
Rizzuto R330
Mize R312

I know the Mize rookie would be the R312, but at the same time given all debates about what is and what isn't a card, and what technically qualifies as a rookie card, I think that the '41 DP would probably be the "latest" acceptable card a person could consider his RC. Not that all people would accept it as a rookie, but some would. Anything released later than the DP would be silly..

Ultimately, my goal would be to get the R312, but for now I'm somewhat satisfied with the DP.. Slaughter and Rizzuto however, the '48 Bowman should never be considered a RC, given that the '41 DP should meet all RC standards.

[DanP]

Originally Posted by novakjr

I know the Mize rookie would be the R312, but at the same time given all debates about what is and what isn't a card, and what technically qualifies as a rookie card, I think that the '41 DP would probably be the "latest" acceptable card a person could consider his RC. Not that all people would accept it as a rookie, but some would. Anything released later than the DP would be silly..

Ultimately, my goal would be to get the R312, but for now I'm somewhat satisfied with the DP.. Slaughter and Rizzuto however, the '48 Bowman should never be considered a RC, given that the '41 DP should meet all RC standards.

I have both the Mize R312 and the '41 DP.

R312: I still have a hard time calling anything larger than a postcard a "baseball card" (which is the reason I kept his '41 DP).

'41DP: I don't mind 2-4 players on a card but do not consider any team card an acceptable RC.

[novakjr]

Team cards are a definite no for me...Unless, it's the only contemporary item available of a player.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Agree with Dave on team cards