Gehrig rookie card?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5191478888&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1

In 1923 and 1924, Gehrig only saw VERY limited action...

and this continued until June 2, 1925, when he took over for Wally Pipp and THEN became the Yankee First Baseman.

So if this set was printed a few months AFTER June 2 in 1925, THEN I can see why they might have included Gehrig in the set.

Then again, since this set was reprinted at some time between 1927 and 1931 with different players and new team designations... it might be that Gehrig was not in the 1925 set and only appeared when the new set came out in 1929 or so?

The fact that Wally Pipp is NOT in the set would seem to indicate that this set was printed at least SOME time after June 2, 1925... since Pipp had been a solid first baseman for the Yankees and was expected by everyone to return and keep playing.

The Exhibit Supply company must have done the same thing (print later in the 1925 season), since they obviously included Gehrig in their 1925 set...

so it is entirely possible that Gehrig's W590 was printed in 1925.

I will try to see if there is any way to determine for sure.

Dan (Darby): What can you tell us about this card you are selling?

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

Fasten your seat belts, here we go again!! Hal, what is your present understanding of what Gehrig's RC is?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Here's the only way to accurately describe it:

Gehrig's first appearance on a baseball "collectible" type item would be the 1925 Exhibit, although some people would argue that these are not "real cards" due to their size and lack of affiliation with any advertising product.

Gehrig's first appearance on an "undisputed" baseball card is the 1927 York Caramel.

If this W590 was printed in 1925, then it would be "tied" with the Exhibit for earliest appearance on a "collectible" type item... since some people do not consider strip cards that had to be hand cut by the purchaser to be "real cards."

-----------------------

Please note that I am trying to answer the question honestly and not come down on any side of the issue.

I will be the first person to admit that I would LOVE to buy Leon's SGC slabbed 1925 Gehrig exhibit...

but I would NOT get rid of my 1927 York Caramel if I did.

The safe way to solve the dilemma is to own BOTH.

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

Here is a list from the web.
Lou Gehrig
Year Set ACC Description
1925 Exhibits
1925-31 W590 W590
1926 Exhibits
1926 Kut-Outs Giants/Yankees Die-cuts
1926 Major League Die-cuts
1927 Exhibits
1927 W560 W560 Dual Color
1927 W560 W560 Single Color
1927 York Caramels Type II E210 26

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Not just because I have the highest graded '25 Gehrig (and should have been higher imo) but because I feel the '25 Exhibit is the only "for sure" 1925 card of him it would be my vote for his rookie.....but I am sure Hal isn't finished yet. Hal- can you rewrite the history books on this one too ? I am getting ready for a "163 posts" thread.

[Archive]

Posted By: jackgoodman

Can someone share a scan of the Gehrig exhibit card please.

Thank you.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

[Archive]

Posted By: jackgoodman

Thanks Leon. That's what I call instant gratification!

Jack

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

OK, here's my proposal:

Leon sells me his 1925 Exhibit of Gehrig...

and THEN I will put in the legwork.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

I KNOW Gehrig's real rookie is in the 1924 Daily News Yankees baseball card giveaway set and only one example of each card exists still today in the attic of an 87 year old gentlemen from Passaic NJ.The story goes that he was the one who put together the newspapers and he kept all 1000 sets for himself.His family was very poor at the time and he thought he could sell the cards for a penny each at the stadium,2 cents for Ruth cards.When he realized he would get caught and severly punished he hid the cards up in the old attic at his house.In later years when he moved he threw out all put 1 set of the cards not realizing theyd be worth millions when he was older,especially because they had been untouched for 40 years already.He still has that one set in an old cigar box in his attic to this day.

So all you have to do is find him,offer to buy them from him and youll have a documented one of a kind rookie card of Gehrig.Its a normal size card and was meant for release to the public plus shows him in a Yankees uniform so it meets all the criteria

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

That was a nice story but it was supposed to start out "once upon a time"....

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

I have contacted the American Hosiery Association and based on their archives they have determined that the socks being worn by Gehrig were not manufactured until November 1926. Thus, the earliest that card could have been issued was November 1926, but it is unlikely Gehrig would have posed for a photo before the start of the next season, so the photo is almost certainly from 1927 or later.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

It ain't a card if its that big! You couldn't even hold 'em right. They didn't fit in your back pocket, they were wrong for flipping, they didn't even come with gum - we threw them away when we left the beach.

Whats next? Somebody will tell me those big pictures they usedta put in ciger boxes were cards too, right?

Jes kiddin here Hal - I think just the opposite - I think those big Wheaties almost whole back of the box - cutouts are cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

I like my Yuenglings (1928) because I like Gehrig's face, and it's still from the 20s. It's nice not to be quite so particular:

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

And a handsome face it is too, whatever the issue. Of course he looks even better on the 34 Goudey #37, in my opinion. Actually I remember reading a book called the Top 100 Baseball Cards of All Time or something like that a few years back and they ranked the Goudey Gehrig second behind the T206 Wagner.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

Is this the book, PASJD: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0933893884/qid=1114802809/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-2348196-4699213?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

If so, I wouldn't but too much stock in a book that also lists the 1984 Topps Don Mattingly as one of the 5 all-time best cards. It's equally off in listing the Sportflics Canseco, Bo Jackson, Bob Hamelin, etc.

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

I don't think so, I don't recall there being a lot of modern cards in it, but my memory isn't that clear -- Peter.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

Hal,

If you actually have two 1927's, how about sending one my way - Im now registered for tax deductible charitable donations.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Josh:

The top one is mine.

The bottom one is the one from the post above mine (Sgt. Hoss) that did not show up on his post for some technical reason.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

Hal, I'm going to have the auction ended early and buy the W590 for $50k. I know you;ll be offering me $60k for it by next week.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Channeling Vitale, sorry.

Hal, I think you are protesting too much.

The Exhibit card fits all the criteria of a card and has forever, or at least since the ACC was published and it was assigned a W number. No one I know has ever challenged it as being not a card except for here. As far as product relation, puleese, the distintion is absurd. Under that theory no cards issued by Upper Deck are baseball cards since they are not affiliated with any other product. The worst you can say about ESCO is that they were ahead of the time.

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

"No one I know has ever challenged it as being not a card except for here."

This Board goes where no man (or woman) has gone before. Ain't nothing sacred.

As to the Exhibit, I think the answer to the question "what is a card" is inherently subjective and elusive once one strays beyond the obvious. When Picasso was asked "What is art?" he replied "What is not?" We can probably get a little more precise than that, but not precise enough to reach a consensus.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I think the Exhibit cards are trading cards. They were designed and sold to the general public as collectable pieces of cardboard, and lots of people collected them. In the old days there were vending machines where you could buy both Topps and Exhibit cards from the same machine. The only objection some people have them with the Exhibits being called trading cards is their large size.

[Archive]

Posted By: martin dalziel

I'd absolutely vote Exhibits as cards.

Pretty much all cards were premiums. Buy the product and get the card(s). Buy cigarettes, get a card. Buy bread, get a card. Buy candy, get a card. Patronize a store, get a card. Save coupons, send them in, and then get more cards, etc.

The difference between the early premium cards and Exhibits is that Exhibits weren't the premium, they were the product.

They're cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Dan (darby-s) had no clue and still has no clue about the years of the W590 cards. I am just going off of the 2005 Krause. I hope that someone with more smarts than me on the subject informed Bob of the issue dates. I was offered a hefty chunk by a board member to sell it before ebaying it but since I thought it may be the rookie card, I would ebay it to be fair. I honestly do not know the dates of W590s. I love exhibit cards and my main reasoning for my description was because of the size as David stated above. If anyone has more info, I would gladly add to the description. Dan.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I know there is a board member out there who tracks down the original photos used in T206 cards. I wonder if someone has done the same for the W590 Gehrig. That would go a long way toward answering questions about the date of this card. If it's a Burke photo that Burke didn't take until 1927, then the card is no earlier than that date.

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

That is a very good point Paul. does anyone out here know of the original photos for this strip issue? dan.