Tell me about 1948/49 Leaf

[Archive]

Posted By: Justin

Any experts out there?

How tough are the short prints?

What's up with the numbering?

Was it actually out in 1948?

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Ted Z. is our resident expert, he'll catch up with this thread. And the first thing he will tell you is drop the 1948. It's a 1949 set.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

JUSTIN

First, my suggestion to you is to get a copy of THE OLD CARDBOARD magazine, Issue #9.
I have an 8-page article in this magazine on this set. You will find it very informative.

Then, if you have any questions, I will try to answer them on this Thread.

Regards,

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Agreed Ted Z is your man. Skip numbered set, short prints were impossible until I believe the king himself, Mr. Mint uncovered some full boxes, all short prints. I got my wrapper from one of these. I had the red hat Peterson cataloged, I can tell you there are tons of color variations in this great set!

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

I've recently completed this set (all in PSA 5) and it was more fun than any other set I've tried to assemble. The 101 skip-numbered cards (with "red hat" and Hermansk and Short sleeves Aberson) are all attainable. The fact that I could finish the set kept me interested in it. I have started a few sets only to stop because of the realization that I'd never finish anyways. My toughest were the Paige, Slaughter, Kell, Hermansk and Feller. The PSA 5 grade I was looking for on the Short Prints cost anywhere between $400 and $1200 depending on how bad I had to have it. I did pay $1500 for a couple of the Short prints. The Paige is probably 8-10K in a PSA 5 these days.

There also always seemed to be 3-4 other people bidding on the same ones. After a while I got smart and kept in touch with the other collectors of this set and that helped me find what I needed.

I enjoyed this set so much that I'm considering doing it again. I'm not sure of your budget, but I found it a good challenge to get them all in the same grade for some set consistency (one would think). This also let me focus my chase a bit.

If you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer them. My advice would be to go for it. Good Luck.
Scott (ubiqty)

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Scott,

Congratulations! How long did it take you to complete the set? How difficult was it to obtain the Satchel Paige at a reasonable price.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

If you have the money, it can be completed quickly. And I will guarantee I have variations he is missing as they are uncataloged. An amazing condition he achieved though, that set must be beautiful!

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

Peter,
The Paige just showed up one day. I got it from 707 Sportscards. They have a nice one currently in a PSA 4 which seems like a good buy. It took me a few years (2) to complete the set.

Dan,
I've seen the DiMaggio color variations, and Seerey and a few others. I'd love to see what you've got. Please post scans if you can.

Two of the great people that helped me get it together were Dave Curtis and Anthony Nex. It was always a pleasure talking Leaf cards with them.

Thanks,
Scott.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve M.

is getting my juices pumped up. (Now don't anyone tell TBOB )

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

These cards were never issued in 1948....the Graded Co. labels stating 1948 are false and misleading.
Read my article and you will understand.

Some of my "naked, but nice" '49 Leaf's




TED Z collection

[Archive]

Posted By: nbrazil

Ted

How can you tell reprint vs real ruth leaf cards? I recently bought one raw awhile ago, but im a little suspect that the card is a fake.

thanks in advance.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Ted,

You must be holding on to one of the last ungraded Leroy "Satchel" Paiges.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

Scott- thanks for the kind words- it's always been great dealing with you and David Curtis.

6 years into this set and I"m still trying to finish the upgrades. The color variations just add a bit of difficulty to it as well.
Here's a few of mine:







Dan, you sent me a few scans a few years back but I lost them, can you add some more to this? I've got a pair of Brissie and a Chapman pair as well.

Also, Ted and I were discussing this wrapper a few months ago- there seems to be one that says baseball on it, and this one that doesn't. Dan, or anyone else, do you know if each series had a different wrapper?

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

ANTHONY

Good to see your picture posts.....
Here's one of the "strangest" Leaf printing errors ever seen.

Also, here is a picture of the Leaf BB Wrapper that I opened as a kid in 1949.
Included, is a 1949 Bowman Wrapper that I provided to The Old Cardboard for my article.

Your Wrapper is still a big mystery, it may have included Leaf's Football cards, but I am not sure.
Perhaps someone on this Forum can identify what Leaf Gum cards were included with your Wrapper ?

TED Z collection

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Can you post scans here of the front and back of your 1949 Leaf Ruth card ?

And, I should be able to tell you if it is a real one.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

Ted-
when you were opening packs in '49, were you able to buy both series, or just the common one? I believe Peter Thomas was opening packs then too (Peter, if I'm wrong I apologize)- were either of you guys able to get the 2nd series? And did y ou get any of the premiums back then?
Someone said that the wrapper I posted was from the sp series, but that doesn't make sense. And if it was football why didn't they replace "baseball" with "football" instead of "pictures"? Is it possible my wrapper is a boxing one?

Leaf certainly had issues with plate registration, but that is the worst I've seen!
Other than the Musial variation that sold last year in Mastro I've never seen another white background until Ted's post. How scarce are these?

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

If I remember, the second series was only available in three states. And I wasn't born yet!

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

In Hillside, NJ in early 1949, lots of Leaf BB packs were available for us kids and they were all 1st Series.
I never knew there was a 2nd Series of 49 cards until 1978.
In the Boston area, where Peter Thomas collected these Leaf's, the 2nd (or SP) Series was available.

Prior to writing my article in The Old Cardboard, I did some research into your wrapper and was unable
to narrow down what Leaf product it was associated with.

The 1948 Leaf Boxing packs had "Knock Out Gum" printed on their wrappers.

I have a picture of a Leaf Football pack Box somewhere with the term "PICTURES" on it (as on your
wrapper). If I find it, I will scan it for you on this Thread.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

Ted- Thanks, as always, for the info.
Football makes the most sense- I can't see them changing the wrapper for the 2nd series and making it less product specific.

On the distribution of the sp series, wasn't Rosen's unopened find from Florida? while that doesn't mean they started out there, it would be interesting to track down where exactly they went.

I recall an article in The Trader Speaks about '74 or '75, where they were discussing new found Leafs, and at that point the set included about 88 cards. I"m guessing that Rosen's find significantly increased the amount of cards in circulation. To date I've only seen or heard of 1 unopened short print pack- unfortunately I didn't note the wrapper on it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Thomas

Ted is right, I was able to get the first series during the summer and second series at Cashman's store on my way home from the second grade.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

Peter- do you recall if the distribution of the 2nd series was pretty even, or were you left with lots of some cards and few (if any) of others? It seems like there are definite differences in the scarcity of a few of the SP's.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Thomas

The whole thing was very confusing at the time. I thought that you should be able to get all numbers as did Mr. Cashman. Bob Olshansky and I knew that there was a Page card, but never could find one. I had taped my cards from the top onto my bedroom wall, leaving spaces where missing cards could go. Dups were put away or traded. When the cards dried up there were lots of gaps on the wall. When we moved the next year, my mother carefully removed the cards and put them away. They all had tape residue on them but not much other damage. I still have the cards and they are in 1, 2 & 3 holders, but very sharp at the corners. My set is much higher grade, but the ones with the tape residue are the ones I love.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

Peter- were there gaps because it was skip numbered, or because you were missing cards you knew existed (like Paige)? I had a considerably harder time finding a few of the short prints, and I know Scott G. had some of the same ones he was stuck on as well. I know there are also condition rarities and that is a whole other discussion, but I'm talking more about just some being harder to find than others.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

ANTHONY

Like Peter.....my original Leafs, with rounded corners (because they were great for flipping and scaling),
are still more cherished than the nice ones I have in my 100 card set (missing Doby).

The Satchell Paige is definitely less available than the other 48 - SP cards. In my article, I refer to the
Alan Rosen original find, which totaled 576 - 2nd series cards. There were only 3 - Paige cards found
when the 96 wax packs were opened. The other 48 players yielded a normal distribution of approx. 12
cards each.
Personally, I have also found Kell and Slaughter to be tougher than the other cards in this series.

The owner of these 4 unopened boxes in this find was originally from Michigan and had moved to Florida.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Thomas

The gaps were for both reasons. I had all 49 cards of the first series, but thought I was missing cards. When the second series came out I filled in some gaps. I got 38 cards from the second series (a total of 87). I had some of the second series with several dups. 11 second series cards I never got with Page the one that I really wanted, again I thought that I was missing 80 or so cards because of the skip numbering. Cashman's ran out of the second series not too long after school began. I was seven and details are a little fuzzy, but I was addicted to the cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Upon completing the tough challenge of this 1949 LEAF set....then the fun begins to find all the printing oddities.....



TED Z collection

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanodakis

ANTHONY

Here is a Football display box (depicted in an old Mastro Catalog) that shows Leaf's use of the word "PICTURES"
and associating it with their 1949 FB cards.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

Ted- I think that removes all doubt- it definitely is a football wrapper.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

ANTHONY

I am not sure my pix completely removes all doubt. If you look at my post with the Bowman and Leaf
wrappers......Bowman was first out in 1948 with the logo "BASEBALL BUBBLE GUM" on their wrappers.
And, when Leaf in 1949 printed these same words on their wrapper, Warren Bowman (who made a 2nd
career of going to court) sued Leaf for stealing Bowman's Copyright.

At some point in 1949, Leaf had to redesign their Wrapper to the one you have. I do not know if this
was done prior to Leaf's 2nd series of BB cards, or after. It is still possible that the 2nd series BB cards
were packaged in the wrapper you have; as, it is my understanding that Leaf's 2nd series was issued
at the beginning of the Summer of '49.

I am quite familiar with the details of Alan Rosen's "scarce" Leaf find. But, it was 20 years ago, and no
one recalls what the wrappers looked like. None were saved, they were all sold.

Anyhow, I will continue to research this wrapper mystery.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

Ted,
I'm surprised PSA would give a "2" grade without a qualifier to your Gordon card with a Feller back. This isn't intended to be a grading company bash. Do you find the wrong back cards in this set sell for more or less that a correct backed card? I would think the correct back would sell for more.
Scott.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Ted wrote: "First, my suggestion to you is to get a copy of THE OLD CARDBOARD magazine, Issue #9. I have an 8-page article in this magazine on this set. You will find it very informative."

IMVHO, this is the best article I have ever read on baseball cards. I only own one 1949 Leaf card, but I still found the article incredibly interesting and informative. Thanks to Ted and Old Cardboard. The article itself made me interested in picking up a few of these great cards.


Anthony - great scans, it's fun to see these side-by-side comparisons.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

Ted- I know at least one pack from Rosen's find was sold unopened and was graded by GAI- I saw it at the Hollywood Park show a couple of years ago, part of a full post war pack run.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

I'm not surprised with anything PSA does or how it grades. Check-out the new Thread I just posted on the Evers card.

And, the answer to your 2nd "Q".....the wrong back cards (that have surfaced only on 2nd Series cards) can be quite
valuable to advanced collectors of the 1949 LEAF's. Some will pay quite a premium for them. This Gordon/Feller is the
last one I have left from a group of 22 such 2nd Series cards.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

The biggest trend in the 1948-49 Leaf set is that the short prints in PSA 8 are now going for more than Joe DiMaggio(card 1). I just bought a Joe D psa 8 for a touch over $6,000 and the short prints have recently been selling at $7-8,000.

The 1948 Leaf Football set is even more on fire with the HOF's going for staggering prices.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

I cannot account for the 1949 Leaf BB 2nd Series cards.

But, at the Philly Show last week in Reading, I observed what you are saying about the 1948 Leaf
FootBall cards. And, the higher prices on the hi-end graded cards is lifting up the prices on the
lower ones.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Crandell

Ted,

There is a FB Rookie Card subset on PSA that has drawn a lot of attention and competition and since the 48 Leafs are the hardest rookie cards(my recollection is there is a thread up on the PSA message Boards talking about it with 500 or so posts) to find in high grade it has driven prices of these to ridiculous levels. Even "run of the mill HOFers like Mel Renfro have seen his 1965 Philadelphia card jump to over $400 in psa 8. But cards like 48 Leaf Baugh and McAfee have jumped to five figures in PSA 8.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

JIM C

If the Leaf's are hot then the Bowman's are, also. And, especially the Rookies whose #s are "Divisible by 3".

Johnny Lujack (#3) comes to mind, also Charley Conerly (#12), and a few more in the 1948 Bowman set.

Also, one Rookie card in the 1948 Leaf set that is really tough to find in sharp condition is Jackie Jensen.
This is one card to invest in, as it is seldom found in ExMt or better......since it was originally printed on
the corner of the 49-card Leaf sheet.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Ted, you won't like hearing this...but the 1948 Leaf football cards are hot, not the 1948 Bowman cards. Why? Because the PSA Registry's Football Hall Of Fame set designates the 1948 Leaf cards for most of the players as their rookie cards, and not the 1948 Bowman cards. Thus the guys trying to complete that artificial set are going after Leaf cards and not Bowman. Count me in as one of those idiots...the dark side of the PSA Registry is tough to resist.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

King,

You are absolutely correct--it is the main reason why the 48 Leaf HOFers are going through the roof.

[Archive]

Posted By: Justin

Well, I think I am gonna go for it. I am gonna try and start a low-grade set of 1949 Leaf. I got a psa 1 Musial off of ebay as part of my 3000 hit collection, so that's my starting point.

All this talk has been very helpful, and the more of the set I see the more appealing it gets. I love the crazy backgrounds and the weird color and picture choices. Plus it has a ton of great players in it too.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

I fully appreciate what you are saying about the Registry factor. However, this my be another case
where the Grading Cos. are deluding the collecting public (as they have with their "1948" label for
the 1949 Leaf BB cards.

In 1984 I wrote an article in SCD on the 1948 Bowman FB card set, so I know a lot about these cards.
I am not certain that the 1948 Leaf FB cards preceded the Bowmans that year.

It's going to take me a few days to dig up my research on this. Can't do it today, as we are going out.

I am afraid you will be disappointed in what I come up with to dispute the Registry's claim. But, then I
am just one "little dude" in the big world of this Sportscard hobby....so, who is going to listen to me.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Ted,

I won't be disappointed. I do not collect the Rookie Set as a set although I do put my cards in there from the sets I do collect.

Many times when there is a disagreement or a question PSA polls the people who collect the set and asks them what they would consider the rookie card.

I like the 48 Bowman FB--I have 3 9s, 102 8s and 3 7s and am trying to upgrade the 3 7s but the pops are very low for the 3 cards I have in 7(3,3 and 2 for 8 or better).

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

This is an interesting thread but it is so annoying to read because the screen is too wide. This is due to posters not sizing their photos properly. Leon, might be time to start another thread on how to post pictures. It's so distracting to have to scroll left to right to read every sentence.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Ted, I wouldn't be disappointed, I like learning new stuff. So are you saying the 1948 Leaf football set is also a really a 1949 issue? Then what of the 1949 Leaf issue?

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Leaf issued two different years of football cards- how could both have been made in 1949? That would be unprecedented.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

OK, I am back.......

And, I am curious as to which three 1948 Bowman FB cards you have to UPGRADE ?

My guess on two of them would be Johnny Lujack (#3) and Buford Ray (#108).

I put together 2 sets of these FB cards and those two have always been tough to find
in really sharp condition.

I know this since I once owned all three UNCUT 36-card sheets of this set. And, Lujack
and Buford were on the corners of the last (Short-Printed) sheet.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Ted,

I am missing the three lowest pops in the set in PSA 8--Luhn(9), Garness(90) and Steele(106). All are pop 2 or 3 in psa 8.

Ray is a pop 5 I believe and Lujack a pop 7--still very tough cards.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Somehow you misundertood what I said......
I said.....

"I am not certain that the 1948 Leaf FB cards preceded the Bowmans that year."

"that year".....meaning 1948. I never said the 98-card 1948 Leaf FB set was issued in 1949.

I have some doubts that the 1948 Leaf FB set was issued before the 1948 Bowman FB set
in 1948. In 1948 Leaf.....1st issued a non-sports set of PIRATES.....then they issued their
"Knock Out Bubble Gum" Boxing set of 50 cards (printed on White cardboard stock).

This set was so popular they reprinted it (this time with 49 cards) on Gray cardboard stock.

And finally, sometime in the Fall of '48 issued in two Series their FB set.

Leaf was very busy throughout 1948 producing millions of GUM cards.

I collected all these sets as a 9 year old kid....and there might have been other sets, that I
am unaware of; that Leaf produced in 1948.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Thanks Ted...I appreciate the clarification.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

<<<In 1948 Leaf.....1st issued a non-sports set of PIRATES.....then they issued their
"Knock Out Bubble Gum" Boxing set of 50 cards (printed on White cardboard stock).
This set was so popular they reprinted it (this time with 49 cards) on Gray cardboard stock.>>>

Ted-
I have a question about the Leaf boxing issue. Graziano was issued and pulled quickly, with just a handful known. I'm assuming he was the 50th card on the white cardboard stock.
The only thing that doesn't make sense is that Leaf used a press sheet that would only allow 49 cards. Some card must've been swapped out with Graziano, but no card seems to be less available in that set than any other, with the exception of Graziano. Any idea which got substituted in the final run?