Why is (this card) worth more than (this card)?

[Carter08]

Never been a huge Joe D fan but his 41 Play Ball is in my top 10 best looking cards. Ditto for 48/49 Ted.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Never been a huge Joe D fan but his 41 Play Ball is in my top 10 best looking cards. Ditto for 48/49 Ted.

Definitely the 1941 Play Ball of Joe DiMaggio is a great card, but like Matt said previously registration is key, as can be seen in his perfectly registered card.

Brian

[Carter08]

I agree. As a net54 newbie one thing I also want to add that is a complete off topic is that Warren Spahn is very underrated. Anyway, back to the topic at hand…

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I agree. As a net54 newbie one thing I also want to add that is a complete off topic is that Warren Spahn is very underrated. Anyway, back to the topic at hand…

This thread needs more card pictures anyway. Here is my favorite Spahn card.

[G1911]

The 1941 Play Ball is scarcer than the 1939, and a color image of Joe that is a classic pose. The 1939 is not, nor is it a rookie by any reasoned definition.

The 1952 Mantle vs. 1951 Mantle is a dead horse that has been beaten numerous times.

The 1961 and 1962 Maris are similar value in low grade. In higher grade card #1 carries a premium. This is normal. I like both.

The Tiffany is obviously superior to the regular set because it is a higher quality production of the same image, made in 1% or less of the quantity. Of course it will cost more.

Warren Spahn is underrated.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by G1911

The 1952 Mantle vs. 1951 Mantle is a dead horse that has been beaten numerous times.

Not really. The M101-4/5 Babe Ruth went from a nothing special card to his most expensive card in a MLB uniform because a minority hyped in as a rookie card. The 1951 Bowman Mantle is his true rookie card. In today's hobby where cards like the M101-4/5 Ruth or 1925 Exhibit Gehrig have taken huge jumps, there is no reason why Mantle's RC hasn't done the same and overtaken the 1952 Topps.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by rats60

Not really. The M101-4/5 Babe Ruth went from a nothing special card to his most expensive card in a MLB uniform because a minority hyped in as a rookie card. The 1951 Bowman Mantle is his true rookie card. In today's hobby where cards like the M101-4/5 Ruth or 1925 Exhibit Gehrig have taken huge jumps, there is no reason why Mantle's RC hasn't done the same and overtaken the 1952 Topps.

It’s a dead horse. People have been complaining about the 1952 Topps costing more and not being an actual rookie for literally my entire life. Nothing has changed, nor is it about too. No matter how many times this is discussed or how true it is that the 1952 is not a rookie, it’s value only continues to increase. The gap is huge, and it’s not changing.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by bnorth

This thread needs more card pictures anyway. Here is my favorite Spahn card.

Love the Spahn! Hard for me to pick my favorite but that’s up there. Collected a Spahn run earlier this year. Love that he ends with a 65 Topps on the Mets. Anyone know why he never appeared on Bowmans after the first few sets?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Love the Spahn! Hard for me to pick my favorite but that’s up there. Collected a Spahn run earlier this year. Love that he ends with a 65 Topps on the Mets. Anyone know why he never appeared on Bowmans after the first few sets?

Spahn was in the first 6 Bowman sets from 1948-1953. I would guess he signed an exclusive contract with Topps as the reason he wasn't in the last 2. 1953 Bowman is my favorite Spahn card.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by rats60

Spahn was in the first 6 Bowman sets from 1948-1953. I would guess he signed an exclusive contract with Topps as the reason he wasn't in the last 2. 1953 Bowman is my favorite Spahn card.

I wonder how many fans appreciate that Spahn is the winningest left handed pitcher of all-time, knocking Eddie Plank into 2nd place. Says something about his endurance and playing in the modern era.