In Theory

[mintacular]

In theory there should be a larger supply of HOFers/stars in existence since these players would've been more likely to be saved than tossed. Is this assumption true and if so, to what extent? Taking out other considerations such as short-prints, etc if you did a count of Ty Cobb v a common there should be a larger supply of Cobbs (albeit demand/availability is a different tale).

[bcbgcbrcb]

Especially true for redemption issues such as W600, where the collector could choose which player they wanted. In these cases, the more obscure players would be countless times rarer than the Wagners, Mattys, Youngs, etc.

[hangman62]

I see your thought process on the subject, but I didnt think guys would say way back.."OK..Im no longer into bb cards...I will throw away or give away everything except my Seavers,and Clementes...I know I didnt save my "favs" or make sure they stayed with me.
I tend to think collectors who stayed with it..saved the complete shoebox

[Brian Van Horn]

Let's not forget the wildcard of mother's cleaning.

[rhettyeakley]

It probably all balances out in the end. While a Cobb may have been "kept" more by people I also suspect Cobb may have been "more handled" by others as they were more likely to keep one in their wallet, pocket, or whatever the case may be thus causing more damage, loss, etc.

When it comes to borderline HOFers and the like there wouldn't be any appreciable difference. Also keep in mind that some HOFers were lesser known than their non-HOfer counterparts back in the day. People like Hal Chase, Larry Doyle, and Mike Donlin were much better known than some that eventually made it into Cooperstown (ie Ray Schalk, Bobby Wallace, etc)

[ctownboy]

hangman,

I don't know about that. Back in the mid 1990's, I bought card collections from two different guys who had collected the cards as young boys. The cards I bought were Topps from 1956 to 1962. The ONLY cards they would NOT sell me were their Mickey Mantle cards.

Both of these guys said the reason they were selling their collections was because the cards had just sat in a closet or attic all of those years and that they needed the money. The funny thing is, the Mantles were the most valuable cards.

So, I think there are more guys out there who, if they had to get rid of their collections way back when, would have begged their parents to be able to keep their favorite player if they had to get rid of the rest of their cards.

David

[bijoem]

your theory works for the T200 set.

the worst teams are the hardest to find.

[dstraate]

Originally Posted by ctownboy

hangman,

I don't know about that. Back in the mid 1990's, I bought card collections from two different guys who had collected the cards as young boys. The cards I bought were Topps from 1956 to 1962. The ONLY cards they would NOT sell me were their Mickey Mantle cards.

Both of these guys said the reason they were selling their collections was because the cards had just sat in a closet or attic all of those years and that they needed the money. The funny thing is, the Mantles were the most valuable cards.

So, I think there are more guys out there who, if they had to get rid of their collections way back when, would have begged their parents to be able to keep their favorite player if they had to get rid of the rest of their cards.

David

Agreed. I bought countless packs in the 90s. I have every Sandberg I ever pulled, but no commons left. When I left home, I took the Rynos and a few other stars with me. The rest were disposed of by my mother.

[ls7plus]

This thread reminds me of one a short while back when I believe we were tossing around the idea of rare cards which were not recognized as such, or why certain cards were rare, and I brought up the '39 Exhibits Gehrig. Larruping Lou's last card was quite likely pulled from production by late May, 1939, when the nature of his terminal illness became widely known, and the Exhibit Supply Company would not have wanted to be seen as seeking to profit from the misfortune of a dying man. And indeed, the PSA pop count reflects this, with a total of 11 graded to date, as compared to 20-some of the Ted Williams, No. 9 shows (which I personally believe to be a one-year issue, replaced by the truly more artistic follow-through pose which was issued for many years thereafter).

Adam (Exhibitman), who most certainly is in a position to know as one of the foremost Exhibits experts here on this board or anywhere, for that matter, pointed out that while Gehrig is indeed difficult to locate, Johnny Rizzo, a journeyman outfielder who played a total of five seasons for the Pirates, Reds, Phillies and Dodgers from 1938-1942, is almost impossible to find. In 557 career games, Rizzo hit a total of 61 homers and batted .270. Since the Exhibits were purchased [I believe] one at at time for [a penny?] from machines located in arcades and the like, the possibility that Rizzos were discarded in disappointment looms large, while a much higher percentage of the Gehrigs were kept.

I know that as kids, those of us who wanted the stars and were not completist, set collectors, absolutely threw away a lot of '60's Topps cards depicting players we derisively referred to as "scrubs."

My 50 cents worth. Nice thread.

Larry

[Bridwell]

Patrick, I agree with your theory. One evidence is the Pop reports of SGC and PSA. Although Pop reports cannot be relied on to be perfect, they often show the HOFers with double the population of common players. This is true of many prewar sets. Collectors are more likely to invest in slabbing HOFers, but the number of higher-grade HOFers is often twice as many as commons. I would expect that higher-grade commons that are valuable cards worth over $200 should have higher populations similar to HOFers.

It is possible that certain popular players were double-printed, even in old tobacco and candy sets. Despite being handled more, the HOFers are easier to find in high-grade than many of the 'commons'.

[FrankWakefield]

Greater survivability for star players has been accepted in the hobby for some time. But I don't buy into the pop report proof... The HOFers are more likely to be sent in to be slabbed, and again to be reslabbed. At best the pop reports are proof of how many times a certain card has been graded, assuming that the graders correctly identified the card...

[almostdone]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

Greater survivability for star players has been accepted in the hobby for some time. But I don't buy into the pop report proof... The HOFers are more likely to be sent in to be slabbed, and again to be reslabbed. At best the pop reports are proof of how many times a certain card has been graded, assuming that the graders correctly identified the card...

Great point. I feel many of the stars would have the potential to be reslabbed two, three, or more times as opposed to the common player.