Should I stop making sets and become a HOF collector?

[Archive]

Posted By: Geoff Litwack

Hello all,

I just finished the most difficult set of my baseball card collecting career (1933 World Wide Gum), and while it was challenging and fun, it made me wonder if I should give up collecting sets and focus on singles. If I broke up my other sets and sold off the commons, it would free up a lot of capital I could use to pursue single cards I've always wanted - maybe an M116 Wagner, maybe an N28 Kelly? On the other hand, will I miss all of those beautiful Diamond Stars who just didn't happen to make it to the Hall? Has anyone else made this transition?

I started collecting modern cards in 1987, and around '93 I realized that I really loved older stuff - I was a big Baseball Cards magazine reader, and there was a really passionate article about 1971 Topps that made me want to collect them, so I sold all my modern stuff and got started. Since then, I've finished earlier and earlier sets (65 Topps, 54 and 55 Bowman, 1941 Play Ball) and sold them off to fund even older and challenging ones. That's my pattern - what about you?

[Archive]

Posted By: Al Crisafulli

Hi Geoff:

About two years ago, to get some focus into my collecting, I decided to assemble a run of sets from the 26 years the Yankees won the World Series. That enabled me to choose from a lot of sets, but eliminate a LOT MORE.

After a while, I started getting disappointed about certain sets I liked, but "could not" collect. 1933 Goudey. 1957 Topps. T205. The list is endless.

To help satisfy my desire to own some of these card types, I decided to begin a HOF set.

I can honestly say that I have never had so much fun collecting. The hobby has taken on a whole new dimension, as I seek out new card types to learn about, swap cards with other HOF collectors, and build a really cool, unique set of cards.

So I guess the short answer is: HOF collecting is an absolulte blast, and while I might not recommend abandoning set collecting altogether, assembling a HOF set is an unbelievable challenge and well worth the effort.

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: V117Collector

Geoff,

Hay nice job on finshing the 1933 WWG set, just one question is there a 33 Lajoie WWG card and if so was the card a short print like the 33 goudey Lajoie?

If I had all your cards I would sell most of the cards like Topps, Bowman and any other common cards (money wise) then buy a M116 Wagner or N28 Kelly, ect.

Its really up to the collector and what he's into. I like small sets V117 or e95 know more than 30 cards and you could flip the set fast then buy the card that you could never afford, then start all over again. (movin on up)


"always looking for 1923 Maple Crispette cards"

Brad

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Although I don't collect sets anymore, I could never give up the common players. This is where the true character of baseball lies. I also couldn't give up the commons becuase almost all the cards that I think are the best looking feature players you've hardly if ever heard of. Most HOFers tend to have very bland, run of the mill cards.

If you want to give the HOF angle a test run, you might try breaking the set that means the least to you and see how you feel about it over time. On a precentage basis, commons are going to go up in vlaue more than HOFers, so sitting on them a bit longer while you doa test run won't hurt your purchasing power.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

With the amount it costs to build a set nowadays, I think set collecting will become A LOT less prevalent among those of us on a very fixed income. The more wealthy on this board will have the flexibility to collect sets, and that's fine. Myself, I have recently discovered within myself that set collecting is very boring. I enjoy getting oddball cards, types, and other weird stuff. If you sink your attention toward building a set, you're missing out on many great cards in the hobby.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

I generally do not like purchasing commons. As a result, I have primarily focused my attention on HOFers. My original goal was at least one of each player (no mgrs and umpires) who played in one of the major leagues (eliminates primarily Negro League players who frankly cost way too much money). That is still my long term goal. However, in the process, I have decided to pursue a couple of small 30 card caramel sets. Despite hating having to shell out money on the commons, I like the challenge of going after the set.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Ceresi

For me, I am almost complete with my T-205's. I would not have had the enjoyment of being a collector (as opposed to a pure investor) had I not compiled the set, commons and all. In fact, I have had more fun (with my late Dad) collecting the commons because you can still buy a nice conditioned T-205 common without mortaging your house.

Having said that, instead of thinking about unloading your commons, why not keep the fun of collecting the sets and slowly upgrade?

By the way, my answer to your inquiry might be different if you start including contemporary cards in the mix. A good friend of mine collects nothing but Harmon Killebrew cards. He loves Harmon and, as such, is a collector of a HOFer not a set collector. He has, though, expressed his frustrations to me recently because it is impossible to keep up with all of the wierd Harmon cards that still hit the market (everything from oddball cards to jersey and autographed cards)! My advise to him, by the way, is to break the habit of buying everything Harmon. I think he has well over a thousand Killebrew cards. To my way of thinking, having only Harmon cards during his playing days in superior condition is more attainable and more fun to collect than the contemporary odd cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

Make up your own sets. By that I mean: collect all of the players who hit 4 hrs in a game, Federal Leaguers with their F.L. insigna on the uniform, and lots more.

You will discover "new" commons and have a reason to put Pat Seery next to Gil Hodges and Lou Gehrig.

But don't sell what you already have first - you may need a lot of them.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

there is no Lajoie in the 33 World Wide Gum set. the set only has 94 cards compared to the 240 in the american version

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Geoff - congrats on the completion of the 33 WWG set!
The difficulty of completing this set is probably one of the reasons why so few attempt it, that and the fact it is not American. I do think in cards, sometimes supply actually increases demand.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

is whether I would rather have a rare common (oxymoron, I know) or a common HOFer. I go with quality of player every time. Demand for Ty Cobb is constant; demand for Joe Shlabotnick isn't. When the few guys making top tier sets get finished or get bored, the high priced commons are going to drop precipitously, and I don't want to be left holding the bag on a card I really don't care about.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

Like most collectors, I started out collecting sets. But over the past 36 years, my priorities have changed as I have discovered the wonders of vintage cards and the limitations of my budget. Today, my collection is smaller than it ever has been and collecting is more rewarding than ever. I basically collect the players I like in the sets I like, but with an emphasis on collecting the most interesting and attractive vintage cards, and also, keeping the collection as small but as diverse as possible. Collecting sets makes little sense to me now because most of the sets I like are out of my budget. And collecting HOFers makes even less sense to me because the selection process is so flawed and I can't see why I should buy a card of George "Highpockets" Kelly and not a card of Cecil Travis ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

I enjoy the challange of completing vintage sets. Most HOFer cards are readily available and very expensive. Most nice commons were discarded or overlooked. Making the real challange, of finding the cheaper commons in a set. The T206 collectors are catching on and paying huge money for some of these commons for example. I have to admit though Hal Lewis' HOF set is awesome.

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Chris Counts post is right on the money and exactly how I feel. I am a non-focused collector and I'm lovin' it! To me appearance and how interested I am in a player or shot or pose means everything. I'm not going to shell out $$$ just because I need a card for some set which has more value broken up anyway. However, for those who enjoy set collecting, more power to you.

[Archive]

Posted By: Geoff Litwack

Thanks to everyone for their perspectives. I definitely want to have my cake and eat it, so I'm going to have to figure out how best to do that. Right now I'm leaning toward selling many commons but keeping the ones in the T207 set I've been working on (94/200, sheesh) and going after some of those marquee cards I've always wanted. I don't own a single caramel card, for example, and I'd like to perhaps get my first Old Judge or George C. Miller. I don't think I'm going to go after EVERY HOF (although what an awsome undertaking!), nor am I too concerned about players on the bubble who should or shouldn't be in.

Jay: I hear you about the flavor of the commons. One thought that's stuck in my head is how beautiful some of the Obak common players are, for example (Mohler SF!). Here's a common strip card that's one of my favorites:



James: I'm definitely on a budget and trying to resist bringing in too much "new money" into my little hobby sandbox.

King: I agree with you that the low supply decreases the demand - I doubt I would have attempted the set if I wasn't so naive about the difficulty of finishing the last 10%. Also, I have you to thank for the best card in my set!

Adam: You're right about rare commons - so much of the PRICE is determined by a few rich guys slugging it out at a given historical moment. Not that there's anything wrong with rich guys.

[Archive]

Posted By: RP60

No..Set collectors are the foot soldiers of collecting!! The HOFers will come...

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Ya'll could collect type cards and collect subsets of sets. I know that I recently completed the T205 backs and the 1910 Obak slogans sets.....quite a while ago I finished the M101-4 "back" set....and also the ultra difficult complete run of E94 overprints (known ones)......In addition to that if I like a series I will collect some of them too....like D303 Mothers Bread cards and General Baking....I like them so when they come up I try to nab 'em....while not ever thinking about going for a whole set. I just like the cards. Overall I am a type card collector and it has been a lot of fun. For those of you who don't think you can know the joy of completion doing type cards I can assure you I will be very happy when I complete my Pre-1950 type card set..Ya'll will know.....best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

And it can work as a nice type card set to boot. I've picked up cards from sets I'd never have bothered with because Lefty O'Doul was in them.

I also like to regional collect cards from a particular area or team, like Zeenuts or Bell Dodgers.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Babcock

Sets can be very satisfying to complete. I like the challenge of completing a set that is tough but not impossible, and relatively small. Like E95, for example.

Several times I have started with just one player as a HOF type piece and then got hooked on the whole set. The E103 Cobb is one example. Also the D304 Cobb. And the N300 Anson. On the other hand, Lowdermilk started me on T207. I collect what I enjoy but what I enjoy keeps changing!

[Archive]

Posted By: nbrazil

collect what you like and what is within your budget. that's my philosophy. right now, im working on essentially three projects...all of which will probably take me a lifetime to complete (unless i win the lottery): hall of famers in t206 and 1951 bowman...and hall of fame rookie cards. all three projects take time to build...and will cost a pretty penny. i thought about collecting the entire t206 set...but, i felt like i wanted to collect players who made a difference in the game (that doesnt mean all non HOF'ers didnt...e.g. joe jackson, pete rose). but, buying a card of some unknown player doesnt tickle my fancy.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Todd

>>...but, buying a card of some unknown player doesnt tickle my fancy...<<

How many folks on here had ever heard of Dode Paskert (for example) before they began collecting cards? (He comes to mind because of an eBay listing I saw recently for a card of "Dodo" Paskert.)

I'm a team collector, a Washington fan all my life. Until I began collecting, I had never heard of Clyde "Deerfoot" Milan--even though he beat Cobb one year for the SB title, and was a coach for Washington on into the 50s. Now when I'm looking to fill in my type set, if I have a choice I'll take the Milan card every time. There's one less "unknown" player in my little corner of the universe.

The thrill of discovery is part of the enjoyment I get out of collecting. Someday I'll even find out why Germany Schaefer was the lone Washington player in so many sets.

Bill

[Archive]

Posted By: pete

they can also be very frustrating. especially if you depend on ebay or other auction sites and are not a recent lottery winner or smart enough to have a high dollar profession...i envy the cash flow! i've had hundreds of modern sets and sold them off to switch to the vintage stuff when a pack of cards started running $3.99 for a bunch of crap.

but since in the vintage stage, i have started 5 different sets and stopped all 5 of those sets due to being out bid or just lack of cash to buy the card when available somewhere like the b/s/t...or even seeing the card at all. so i am now just a regular "certain player" or "card type" collector, over the last 6-8 months i've bought some good cards in hopes to turn them around later and so far i have paid for a lot of the cards that i am planning on holding in my personal collection...so thats fun too!

maybe i was too impatient to keep looking for those needed cards but now my blood pressure is much more steady on sundays at 6pm

[Archive]

Posted By: pete ullman

I'm feeling the frustration too! I'm trying to be a type collector but I feel my lack of assertiveness over the years has rendered this dream impossible for me. After losing a voskamps and 2 lechners tonight on ebay I got to thinking...why try to collect 1 of every type of card when some of them are so freakin' ugly...like the lechners! Who cares if they're rare...they're butt ugly! There are way too many $500-$5000 types I'm in need of...i'm afraid it'll never happen.

Thanks for listening. I'm going to take a bath and rethink my life!

pete in mn

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

Pete, good thinking. If it's butt ugly and you don't like it then don't get it. I suppose if it were a deal of deals then what the heck but why purchase something you're not going to appreciate.

To me the $$$ a card is worth does not equally correspond to the appreciation I have for it. I've got cards worth less than a hundred bucks that I like much more than cards that are worth over a grand. It all boils down to the saying "collect what you like." There's so much material out there... why get something butt ugly unless you're going to appreciate it...

[Archive]

Posted By: pete

that price for a card that you really want should be thrown out the window too! if you're going to keep it in your collection and not just use it to re-sell down the road, then you should spend what you are willing to spend and not worry about paying "way too much"...mainly because later down the road when it comes up again, its going to be the price you would've paid anyway. i thought i overpaid when i bought my matty portrait for $250 a few years ago and now i'd be lucky to find one in the same grade for less than $600...i really enjoy checking out my "collection" of cards and eventually, i'll be able to put them on some photobucket site or something for everyone to see.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

I just don't enjoy the non-photographic ones. I gave up on sets a long time ago when I realized that I could not afford to complete most of them. Even my among my favorites I have very few complete sets.

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

For me "set collecting" feels like a trap. I hate going to a show like Chantilly and feeling limited to one type of card, I love the freedom of scouring dollar boxes for oddities. I actually like having a limited budget (usually $300-400 every 6 months including grading fees), because it helps me plan and get variety for my collection. Even though I only spend $800-1000 a year on cards, I still think I have a nice collection going (plug for my vintage link). If a set or card doesn't have color/appearance then it won't be purchased by me. My collection has no rhyme or reason, and I am having as much fun collecting as ever.