T210 Jackson or T206 Wagner

[Archive]

Posted By: Darren J. Duet

If money were no object which card would you prefer in your collection--an SGC 60 T210 Jackson or an SGC 50 T206 Wagner?

I'd take the Jackson.

[Archive]

Posted By: zach

It would be tough for sure. The Jackson is much more rare but the Wagner symbolizes vintage card collecting. I'd go with the Wagner not only because of the value but its what got me intrested in vintage card collecting.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Can anyone post a picture of the Jackson referred to in this thread? Thanks.


Sorry, I just found the other thread. Thanks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

I'd take the honus as well as it's always been a symbol of the hobby of card collecting. He's a better role model as well.

I think the whole Joe Jackson phenomenon is somewhat overdone?!?!

See the card in the other t210 Jackson thread currently on ebay right now!

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

...................

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Money is ALWAYS an object.

Therefore, the only way to really ask the question is to use money as your guide.

In other words, the question should be:

If you had $400,000 and HAD to spend it all on ONE baseball card...

would you buy the nicest T206 Wagner that you could get for the money...

or the nicest T210 Jackson that you could get??


NOW you have a TOUGH question!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

For $400,000...

I personally would buy the nicest T206 Wagner that I could buy.

I think the Shoeless Joe phenomenon may shrink now that the White Sox have won a World Series again.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Stone

T210 Jackson

[Archive]

Posted By: Wesley

T206 Wagner

[Archive]

Posted By: Shane Killian

T206 Wagner

[Archive]

Posted By: WP

T210 jackson

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

Not that anyone asked, but I'd take the Just So Cy Young or the Baltimore Ruth over either one of them.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Within the parameters presented, Wagner is an easy choice. The T206 Wagner is the iconic card; everyone outside the hobby knows that card and it will always hold its luster. Also, I am in the apparent minority who believe that he conspired with crooked players and gamblers to throw the series. Whether he actually did it or merely cheated the crooks with whom he conspired by playing well in the series is something only he can answer. Buck Weaver I feel sorry for; Jackson not.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Wagner, no question about it.

I have always loved that Jackson card, but I think it is getting a lot of hype now because of the one that sold for 92k in the last REA. People were not even talking about these cards in the same conversation before that. Scarcity is only part of the equation in determining the value of any baseball card. The T206 Wagner will always be the king of baseball cards.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Here is the Jackson in question



Jay

If you can sue a band for making you want to commit suicide, can I sue Barry Manilow for turning me into a wuss in the 70s?

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Goldner

T-206 Wagner.

Nothing against the T-210 Jackson, but to spend six figures, i would want such a card to have a long track record, of elite desirability.

That being said, i have no recollection of the T-210 Jackson, being mentioned in the same breath as the T-206 Wagner, by past generations of hobbyists.

No question however, the Jackson is highly desirable, and there is no need to debate the issue of scarcity.

But, without the Wagner track record, IMO, it just isn't in the same class, regardless of what is happening at present.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian C. Daniels

but Hal!

Shoeless Joe is like Amelia Earhart or Wiley Post or Will Rogers

http://avstop.com/news/wp.html

or even Elvis! He transecends time and space through baseball inigma like Dr. Who in his "TARTUS" swirling through eternity or the headless horseman riding through the night looking for his head~

Like in the end of the song " There's a place for us",somewhere......
out there..........is Shoeless Joe. The vintage baseball fan sets an extra dinner set for Joe at Christmas like the Israelites do for Elijah at the feasts of tabernacles..the man who never died!

Do people feel this way about Honus?

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim James

No question,Wagner!

[Archive]

Posted By: Ryan Christoff

I'd take any condition T210 Jackson over even the best T206 Wagner. Give me an SGC 10 Jackson over an SGC 60 Wagner any day.

-Ryan

[Archive]

Posted By: eric p.

i would take the t210 jackson over the t206 wagner any day of the week!

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

An SGC 60 T206 Wagner? I think I'd take one of them before three (maybe four) of the T210 Jacksons.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ryan Christoff

MW,

Too bad I don't have an SGC 60 Wagner or I'd gladly make that trade.

1/80th of the T206 Wagner population for 1/3rd of the T210 Jacksons? What a steal!

Now, what do I need to trade you for 3 or 4 Baltimore News Ruths???

-Ryan

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike McGrail

Honus wins this one easy.

Joe Jackson is over-rated in my book!

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

The 1919 season isn't going to go away, and I think Jackson is a lot more than a fad. The card is of a beautiful young man who became one of the greatest hitters in baseball, and blew it all away...

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

I won't pretend to have Julie's skills for evaluating how "good looking" a ballplayer is...



but I think that even I can tell that Joe Jackson was a "better looking youngster" than Honus!


Pood old Hans wasn't much of a "looker"!

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Both have media sensation around them. Joe Jackson is by far the more media contrived of the two. With that said my rankings are...

1.) 1914 Baltimore News Babe Ruth
2.) 1909 t206 Honus Wagner
3.) That obscure Joe Jackson card which I think is ugly anyway.

James

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay Miller

Wagner! The Jackson card is just the latest hobby hype. Remember how shocked everyone was when the REA copy went for $94K, WITH THE BUYERS COMMISSION. The seller actually realized a whole lot less than that. Why assume that the bar has been raised for the next copy? IMHO, this is a $50-$70K card, not a $150K card. Jackson hit for average, not much else, kinda like a Wade Boggs of his day. He never hit alot of HRs, only had 100 RBIs once and was not a great stolen base guy. He was also a worse fielder, based on fielding percentage, than Babe Ruth (hardly a name you think of when you think of golden glove outfielders). What he was was ignorant and dishonest. Over time I think his light will surely dim.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ray

T206 Wagner

[Archive]

Posted By: Darren J. Duet

What has kept Wagner alive more than his on field accomplishments(which you and I know all too well)is the T206 card and its hype and aura. If it were not for his T206 card, how many casual baseball fans would know his name. His card transcends the player he was(rightfully or wrongfully).

How many current day baseball fans(or Joe Public for that matter)know who Christy Mathewson was, what team he played for, his meaning to history? Give it time, and if we get a regular dosing of his 1914 CJ card in major auctions(at least once every 2-3 yrs)his name and accomplishments will live forever in the public domain. His popularity will grow(so will his card prices) and less than baseball experts will know all about him.

Thanks to the world getting smaller(internet), we know more about cards;and we'll know more next year! The Wagner card was the first iconic card with a perceived scarcity--long before there was an internet for mass communication. It will always hold that title as the first. Just because it was the first doesn't necessarily equate to it being the best(that's subjective).

The card powers that be have identified 1)scarcer 2)older 3)desirable cards of players who were just as good, if not better than Wagner(eg Cobb, Ruth, Young, Jackson, etc.). Certainly a T206 Wagner has everthing going for it, but in time so will the Baltimore Ruth, CJ Matty, T210 Young, Just So Young<Cy Young Award>, 4BH Kelly, OJ Anson, Cobb/Cobb rev. etc.).

The next million dollar card will be the next high grade version of the aforementioned cards to come to market......if there are any?

[Archive]

Posted By: Ryan Christoff

As with most hypothetical question threads, it seems like most people are ignoring the original post, which included "IF MONEY WERE NO OBJECT."

No financial discussion applies here, so all points made about auction results, etc. aren't really germane to the issue.

Take the money part out of the equation (I know this is impossible for some of you) and now decide which one you'd rather have IN YOUR COLLECTION.

This doesn't mean "Which one you rather have until you sold it to pay for your child's college tuition..." or "Which one is worth more..."

It also doesn't mean "Who was a better player..."

I believe Wagner was a much better player, but I'd much rather have the T210 Jackson. I've always wanted to own that Jackson or a Baltimore News Ruth, but never will. If money were no object, I'd own both...and no T206 Wagner. It is simply not a rare card.

Make me choose between an E107 Wagner and a T210 Jackson, well then I have to think about it (I'd still choose the Jackson). E107 Wagner vs. T206 is another no-brainer: E107.

-Ryan

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Ryan,
Is rarity the only issue in determining desirability for you? There are cards that are rarer than the T210 Jackson as you certainly know. Would you prefer those over the Jackson? I'm not trying to be argumentative. Just trying to understand your reasoning.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Darren J. Duet

While exploring your grandmother's attic, you find a beautiful first edition of Our Pastime, in it sit a Baltimore Ruth, T206 Wagner, T210 Jackson, and Cobb/Cobb reverse. Each card is of equivalent value. Now, you are broke and grandmother needs 200K to save the house. Which, if any or all, do you sell first?

Each card is in a condition which equates to an equivalent value across the board.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ryan Christoff

Jim,

Are you honestly asking me if rarity is the only issue in determining desirability? Probably not, but if that's what you're asking, the answer is "no, of course not." There are hundreds of cards that are rarer than the Jackson. In fact there are dozens of issues where every single card is rarer. Of course, there are literally thousands of cards rarer than the Wagner.

Give me an example of the rare cards you're talking about and I can tell you if I'd rather have a T206 Wagner. Rarity is definitely a factor. Player is a factor. Card image is a factor. Importance of the card is a factor. Uniqueness is a factor. There are other factors, but all of them, including those I just listed, come down to personal preference and opinion.

For example, the T206 Wagner is the most important card of one of the most important card issues, but is an average image (I know this is subjective and many will argue it's a great image, but to me, it's not particularly special), and is incredibly common. The greatness of Wagner himself is another thing the card has going for it, but none of that makes up for the fact that there are 60-80, maybe more, examples of the card.

The Jackson has everything going for it except the importance of the card issue (T210), but the uniqueness of the card and the fact that it features Jackson in the minors makes up for that to me.

If you're baffled by the fact that I would rather have a T210 Jackson than a T206 Wagner, then this must really confuse you: I'd rather have a 1909 Cabanas of Pete Hill than a T206 Wagner in my collection. (A 1909 What? of Who?)

-Ryan

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard

Holy Crap! I am going to start looking for a 1909 Cabanas of Pete Hill!!

(edited to add smiley face)

[Archive]

Posted By: Ryan Christoff

Then I better start looking for a T206 Wagner!!!

-Ryan

[Archive]

Posted By: Wesley

What is a Cabanas of Pete Hill?

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Ryan,
I do not want to start a running argument. My question was based on the following:

"Too bad I don't have an SGC 60 Wagner or I'd gladly make that trade.

1/80th of the T206 Wagner population for 1/3rd of the T210 Jacksons? What a steal!"

I mistook this statement to imply an exaggerated importance given to rarity based on lack of mention of other factors. Sorry for the wrong presumption.
JimB