Post War Must Haves........
 

There are a number of high profile cards, or cards many consider "must haves" for post war collectors.
We all know the big ones on most people lists such as.............

'54 Aaron rookie
'51 Bowman Mantle rookie
'51 Mays rookie
'55 Clemente rookie
'52 Topps Mantle
'55 Koufax rookie
'68 Ryan rookie


Several of the more under appreciated ones off the top of my head are a '60 Yaz rookie, '57 Frank Robinson rookie, possibly a '55 Killebrew rookie, or even a '57 Brooks Robinson rookie.

Obviously, everyone should collect what they like and enjoy, but I like picking up some of the more popular cards too, to help fill out my collection as well.

I alluded to this in another thread, but I think the 1966 NL Batting Leader cards (pictured below) is a bit of a "must have" for many post war collectors.

https://i.imgur.com/169fBorl.jpg?2

It is not terribly valuable, there seems to be a big supply, since there are many on Ebay essentially all the time. But for various reasons, plus I think since this is the only card with all three of these players, it should be a bit more popular than it is. You have 3 of the best players of all time, arguably in their prime as well.

There are a number of other cards I have been watching lately (none of which I own). I am thinking of picking up a few of the more highly coveted "must haves", but I'm thinking about pulling the trigger on a few others as well, even though they aren't quite as sought after as the big ones above.

For example, I think a '53 Topps Satchel Paige is another card that has been rising and becoming more popular. Under appreciated maybe?
I have watched it for months and months, and the higher grade centered examples are not as readily available as they used to be.

There is also a case to be made for pretty much ANY JACKIE ROBINSON card. I've thought for a while now he was a bit undervalued. Boy has his stuff started surging....... and not just his rookie cards either. Most all Robinson cards are rising.
There are probably plenty of reasons for this, but regardless he is starting to be more appreciated, at least in card value aspects.


I'm a bit curious as to some of the other "lesser??" post war must haves many of you think should be a bit more appreciated than they already are.

Let's hear the ones you think should be more in demand/more valuable.


:)

The 1949 Leaf Jackie Robinson is now #2 behind the 52 T Mantle. The Pete Rose RC is definitely on that list and the Seaver RC and Schmidt RC should be too. They are all tougher high numbers. I will never understand the premium given to common rookie cards like Aaron and Ryan that are much easier to find than the others you mentioned and the 3 above. Maybe it is that I am a collector and this hobby is becoming dominated by investors. You have the Chrome LeBron RC PSA 10 with a 2k pop now selling for 5 figures while rare cards of greats sell for much less.

Yes rats...........I agree with the Rose rookie, and Seaver as well.
I think the Schmidt rookie is definitely another, but I don't know that everyone would agree its quite at the "must have" point.

The Seaver rookie in particular seems tough to find in high grade centered/overall appeal. (I'm thinking PSA 7-ish and higher)

I tracked it a year or two back, and finding a high eye appeal example is pretty tough from what I remember.

And I agree with you on the LeBron James cards. If someone were to give me a stack of them, I would sell them and use those funds to pick up some other older baseball must-haves.



:)

Without a doubt this, lower pop than all the others, and the card is iconic. Id rather have it over any of the other post war rookies period.

I wouldn't call them 'must haves', but I will say 'iconic' post war cards. Aside from the big ones you mentioned, I'd include the following:

1953 Topps Mickey Mantle
1957 Dodgers' Sluggers
1962 AL Home Run Leaders
1962 Manager's Dream
1964 Pete Rose
1969 Mickey Mantle
1971 Thurman Munson
1976 Johnny Bench
1977 Mark Fidrych
1984 Donruss Don Mattingly
1989 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr

1952 Topps Eddie Mathews rookie should be on the list.:)

1953 Paige was one I was going to suggest. I do not like 1953 Topps but I had to have one of them. I'd also go with:

1952 Topps Gus Zernial

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...0Zernial_1.jpg

1953 Bowman Mantle
1953 Bowman Musial
1961 Topps Maris
1971 Topps Munson
1972 Topps Clemente

And of course, the 1972 Topps Billy Martin
https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...C%20Martin.jpg
:D

I would say a 1948 Leaf Paige
Gretzky rookie
Jordan Rookie

A man who speaks my language! :D

Aside from Mathews being my first/#1 choice, I'd say a 52 Topps Campanella as well.

Out of my wants and needs for other high number 52's and 3 lows in Pafko, Berra and Martin, I would also love to have these:

53 Paige
53 Mantle
56 Mantle
54 Aaron
55 Clemente

And while collecting mostly hockey cards lately, I would also like:

66 Bobby Orr Rc
79 Gretzky RC
58 Bobby Hull RC

I'm partial to 69T so I might put the 69T Bench and the 69T Reggie on this list.
RayB

73 Clemente. Something beautiful and slightly haunting about the image. And I love that it has the nice, clean, 3,000 hits listed on the back.

Off the top of my head -

*'56 Topps Mantle - Not the most expensive or most desirable Topps Mantle, but as the notorious Brent Huigens once said, "the Mantle that feeds the masses." An attractive card, and his base card from his single greatest season. I'll be honest I can't afford a '52 Topps or a '51 Bowman. But I have two 56's and love them.

*'56 Topps Roberto Clemente - If this work of art is not one of the single most beautiful baseball cards ever produced, then I'm not sure what is.

*'57 Topps Aaron - The reverse photo aside, easily an iconic and immediately recognized Aaron card.

*'68 Topps Ryan / Koosman - The card that exploded around 1990 when people realized Nolan was on the verge of 5,000 K's. It went from a $250 card in 1988 to well over $1,000 in short order.

*'75 Topps George Brett - One of the first mainstream rookies to gain notoriety and value. The fact that George does not have to share this card with someone else is both rare for the time, and desirable.

*'80 Topps Rickey Henderson - Just a classic card. PSA deliberately withholds 10's on it, there have been several convincing studies.

*'84 Topps Don Mattingly - Sorry, but I don't know of a more desired card than this one when I first started collecting as a kid. Even those of us who had never seen him play wanted one.

*'89 UD Ken Griffey Jr., #1 - Perhaps the first post-modern baseball card. A thing of beauty.

Here is one I've long thought was a truly great must-have:

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...20Williams.jpg

To me, it is one of the most beautiful cards Topps ever made.

Agree that these two cards are on the list.

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...ny-bench-psa-8
https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...ackson-psa-6.5

The '67 T Seaver has gotten a lot more expensive in low-mid grade than the Ryan....the scarcity is coming into play as a lot more people seem to be interested in completing the '67 set lately (so the "gotta just have the card" concept has driven that card way up in low/mid grade and taken most of them off the market). Anything around grade 5 or lower is now selling for almost double the Nolan Ryan rookie in the same grade.

Thing is though, high grade '67 Seavers are very cheap by comparison. At the moment, PSA 8 Ryan rookies sell for almost double PSA 8 Seaver rookies (the opposite of the lower grades). High grade Seavers are actually easier to get as a % of total pop for both cards. So despite the current demand for the Seaver in general, there isn't a big premium for a really nice one.

Anyway, looks like the Seaver might be replacing the Ryan as the most sought after pitcher card of the '60s, and is quickly catching up with the Rose rookie as the most desirable card of the decade. Which I would like to see, given that I think he was the best player of all of them.

The Seaver has always been a more expensive card than the Ryan owing to the fact it's a high number SP. But I would agree it's shot up again just recently too. The relationship to value with the Ryan has an interesting dynamic because Ryan's RC shot up when he was still an active player. I used to think Seaver was more a tough card than a desirable one simply because of it being a high number, but I would agree he was at least as good if not a better player than Ryan or Rose. I should have listened to my instincts and sprung for a midgrade one back 5 years or so ago when they were affordable. Oy!

I know it’s not the only, or perfect, metric but all time WAR:

22. Seaver - 109.9 (20 yrs)
60. Ryan - 81.3 (27 yrs)
64. Rose - 79.7 (24 yrs)

I'm not sure about comparing Seaver to Rose, but in his prime he was easily a better pitcher than Nolan Ryan. I think that's lost on a lot of people. You will get crucified for insinuating that kind of thing on many baseball message boards on social media.

Carew - 81.3, and in just 2/3 as many plate appearances as Rose.

Seaver vs Ryan and Carew vs Rose aren't even close. And Johnny Bench's WAR numbers match his reputation and are top of the line too per PA, especially as a catcher. I'm surprised his cards have never commanded much price or attention.

But Rose and Ryan did shiny things compared to the others.

Many good responses here in the thread.
Some I knew (in the back of my mind) and others I never really contemplated.


One more card that seems popular with collectors in this timeframe.......


-1953 Bowman Peewee Reese -


I was just looking on the bay, and there is a PSA 9 of this one, for a mere price of $27,500 O.B.O. :eek:

While I admit it would be nice to have this one, I think I would utilize 27k on a few more iconic cards honestly.

Good stuff.


:)

52 Topps Mantle is Obviously the Grail for me. I'm trying to finish my Mantle Career project, it's something that'll take years for sure, to build up the money and acquire the cards I want. Outside of that there's a couple I have my eye on.

I love 53 Topps Satchel Paige. It's a pretty nice card, and I've always been fascinated by the Negro Leagues. It's also nowhere near as pricey as his rookie. Joe DiMaggio and Ted Williams from the 48 Leaf set are also cards that have always had my eye.

While I know a lot of collectors really like the 53 Bowman Reese, I've never liked it myself. Not even a little bit. I completely agree that 27k could be spent much better than on that card.

Right. Think of all the big additions you could make to a modest collection with 27k. You could literally pick up a half dozen T206 stars if you were so inclined or a '51 Bowman Mantle (plus other key cards) or a '52 Topps Mantle if that is what you were looking to do.




Another card came to me, and although I don't own one yet, I will be picking up one in short order.
We all know there is only one true home run king :) and his name is HANK AARON.

I think the '74 #1 Hank Aaron ALL-TIME HOME RUN KING is also a very under appreciated card.
There are an absolute ton of them around, but you don't see that many in PSA 8+.
Is it the most valuable? No, but it marks one of the most historic events in all of baseball.

Gotta snag me one of those soon.

Must have post-war ? For me only one really - 1949 Bowman Satchell Paige. Picked it up years ago from REA in PSA 8 for around 2500. Heck, I even have that photo in my office framed - love it, love it, love it! All those rookies everyone is so keen on -I passed and put the money into HOFer T206's instead.

In the late summer of 1988, my dad and I walked in to a LCS with an unopened box of 1988 Fleer baseball - then a hot item as it was rumored the print run was going to be limited. We were looking to sell or trade the box.

It was then that I spotted the 1955T Ted Williams in their showcase. It was a beautiful card and we did not have any other Ted cards at that point. After some haggling, we ended up trading the wax box straight up for Ted. A whole box of cards for a single card.

It's one of the treasures of my collection.

Fun reading your trade story for the Williams. And nice to hear your must have card is a card you actually find honestly very attractive - means so much to the joy of collecting to own what you consider is a great looking card. The '55 Williams is indeed a very eye appealing card.

I'd sure add this pair of last cards from their actual careers (both appear on cards a year after these) to the must-have list. The absolutely beautiful, playful Roberto Clemente shot (never mind that his In Action card is sequentially higher), and Willie Mays back in New York, finally donning his Mets uniform...

Attachment 412951Attachment 412952

+1 for sure on the '72 Clemente #309. A poignant shot if you think about it...6 months after that card appeared, he would be dead. In terms of Clemente cards, still one that will not totally break the bank in nice shape.

& HEY - Darren. I recognize that card...! ;-)

How could we forget this one?

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...d%20Merkle.jpg

And yes, I am 10 years old; or at least have the maturity of a ten year old (my wife will swear to that).

Hehehehehe. You said Boner!

John, you're right on the money, there. It's not even that close---Tom Terrific's prime is definitely superior to Mr. Ryan. I love Ryan, and admire his longevity, and all those no-hitters, one-hitters, strikeouts, etc. Be that as it may, Seaver's prime trumps Ryan's. --- Brian Powell

Lots a nice gummies listed and shown----rookies, and more rookies, and even some compelling late career shots. Keep enjoying them. ---Brian Powell

Wow
 

Was keeping on eye on an EBAY auction of a really nice SGC 4 52 Topps Mantle with this thread in the back of my mind. Granted, it was a beautiful card but I was shocked at the late surge last nite. 36 K with an hour to go and almost 30 more bids to finish at slightly less than 58000. Some collectors won`t be denied.

That Mantle was nearly dead centered and those are very hard to find. Im not surprised at all.

So what number would have surprised you?

my point is nothing surprises me for mantle, especially centered ones. Mantle collectors pay up big for nice centered examples, always have.