Overrated/Underrated/Favorite/Least Favourite Singles

[G1911]

The Leaf’s are a 1949 set, Spahn’s mainstream rookie would be the 1948 Bowman.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by G1911

The Leaf’s are a 1949 set, Spahn’s mainstream rookie would be the 1948 Bowman.

Ha classic comment! As a Spahn collector I think both are considered his rookies. And I’m glad you ended the 1948/1949 Leaf debate once and for all. Bravo!

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Ha classic comment! As a Spahn collector I think both are considered his rookies. And I’m glad you ended the 1948/1949 Leaf debate once and for all. Bravo!

There’s been numerous threads on here with the information, the back text makes clear it could not have been issued in 1948. I’m not the one who fixed the dating. His 1949 Bowman and 1949 Leaf are not rookies, it’s the same as the 1952 Mantle. He had a mainstream card in 1948, his 1949 cards cannot possibly be rookies.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by G1911

There’s been numerous threads on here with the information, the back text makes clear it could not have been issued in 1948. I’m not the one who fixed the dating. His 1949 Bowman and 1949 Leaf are not rookies, it’s the same as the 1952 Mantle. He had a mainstream card in 1948, his 1949 cards cannot possibly be rookies.

I’ll go with psa’s take:

https://www.psacard.com/cardfacts/ba...spahn-32/21555

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I’ll go with psa’s take:

https://www.psacard.com/cardfacts/ba...spahn-32/21555

And many of us will acknowledge that Leaf’s copy writer could not foresee the future and that events it talks about having happened have to have happened before printing.

You are perfectly welcome to ignore facts you don’t like and believe in PSA’s infallibility instead of using facts.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by G1911

And many of us will acknowledge that Leaf’s copy writer could not foresee the future and that events it talks about having happened have to have happened before printing.

You are perfectly welcome to ignore facts you don’t like and believe in PSA’s infallibility instead of using facts.

Ok

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by G1911

There’s been numerous threads on here with the information, the back text makes clear it could not have been issued in 1948. I’m not the one who fixed the dating. His 1949 Bowman and 1949 Leaf are not rookies, it’s the same as the 1952 Mantle. He had a mainstream card in 1948, his 1949 cards cannot possibly be rookies.

The Leafs were released in 1949, despite the cards listing a 1948 copyright on their back. The 1948 Bowmans were released in 1948.

This means that Ralph Kiner, Phil Rizzuto, Stan Musial, and Warren Spahn’s 1948 Bowman cards are these players’ true rookie cards.

Because the Leafs were issued in 1949 (not 1948), this also means that Jackie Robinson and Satchel Paige’s 1949 Bowman cards have co-rookie card status with their 1949 (not 1948) Leaf counterparts.

Nonetheless, the majority still consider the Leaf 1948 (and not 1949) cards and co-rookie cards for Kiner, Rizzuto, Musial, and Spahn. This will not change any time soon.

It really doesn’t matter for me. The Leafs should trade at a premium to the 1948 Bowmans. The Leafs were the first post-WW2 color issues, and are beautiful. The 1948 Bowmans are drab. At the end of the day - who cares?!

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

The Leafs were released in 1949, despite the cards listing a 1948 copyright on their back. The 1948 Bowmans were released in 1948.

This means that Ralph Kiner, Phil Rizzuto, Stan Musial, and Warren Spahn’s 1948 Bowman cards are these players’ true rookie cards.

Because the Leafs were issued in 1949 (not 1948), this also means that Jackie Robinson and Satchel Paige’s 1949 Bowman cards have co-rookie card status with their 1949 (not 1948) Leaf counterparts.

Nonetheless, the majority still consider the Leaf 1948 (and not 1949) cards and co-rookie cards for Kiner, Rizzuto, Musial, and Spahn. This will not change any time soon.

It really doesn’t matter for me. The Leafs should trade at a premium to the 1948 Bowmans. The Leafs were the first post-WW2 color issues, and are beautiful. The 1948 Bowmans are drab. At the end of the day - who cares?!

Apparently you care too, as you’ve written as much about the fact as I have.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

The Leafs were released in 1949, despite the cards listing a 1948 copyright on their back. The 1948 Bowmans were released in 1948.

This means that Ralph Kiner, Phil Rizzuto, Stan Musial, and Warren Spahn’s 1948 Bowman cards are these players’ true rookie cards.

Because the Leafs were issued in 1949 (not 1948), this also means that Jackie Robinson and Satchel Paige’s 1949 Bowman cards have co-rookie card status with their 1949 (not 1948) Leaf counterparts.

Nonetheless, the majority still consider the Leaf 1948 (and not 1949) cards and co-rookie cards for Kiner, Rizzuto, Musial, and Spahn. This will not change any time soon.

It really doesn’t matter for me. The Leafs should trade at a premium to the 1948 Bowmans. The Leafs were the first post-WW2 color issues, and are beautiful. The 1948 Bowmans are drab. At the end of the day - who cares?!

Rizzuto is in 1941 Double Play. Why isn't that his RC?

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Rizzuto is in 1941 Double Play. Why isn't that his RC?

Jackie is in well made pants.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Jackie is in well made pants.

Double Play is much more mainstream than well made pants. Jackie is also in 1947 Bond Bread and 1946 Parade Sportive for that matter.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Jackie is in well made pants.

Zing!

Winder if it will be back on the boards or REA, or the boards again