NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 01-29-2023, 04:14 PM
mrreality68's Avatar
mrreality68 mrreality68 is offline
Jeffrey Kuhr
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 5,607
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vintageclout View Post
Unfortunately, you cannot set aside PEDs. Like Clemens when he went to Toronto, Bonds career took off in staggering proportions when he started taking PEDs. Cheating, and there’s no way around it. While both Clemens & Bonds were already future HOFers before PEDs, their extraordinary lifetime numbers are seriously tainted by steroids. For that reason alone, both of them cannot be placed in the top 10 as a pitcher & hitter.
+1 agree
__________________
Thanks all

Jeff Kuhr

https://www.flickr.com/photos/144250058@N05/

Looking for
1920 Heading Home Ruth Cards
1933 Uncle Jacks Candy Babe Ruth Card
1921 Frederick Foto Ruth
Joe Jackson Cards 1916 Advertising Backs
1910 Old Mills Joe Jackson
1914 Boston Garter Joe Jackson
1915 Cracker Jack Joe Jackson
1911 Pinkerton Joe Jackson
Shoeless Joe Jackson Autograph
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 01-29-2023, 04:49 PM
FrankWakefield FrankWakefield is offline
Frank Wakefield
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Franklin KY
Posts: 2,718
Default

+1 for Adam, seeing that the corners of the card are suspect. And while I have sometimes bid on PWCC stuff, I share and concur with his concern.

That is responsive to what I thought the initial post was about.



But so many want to contrast Gehrig with Foxx, or discuss PEDs, or both. So on PEDs... I see a distinction between using something that isn't prohibited with something that is prohibited. Seems for some folks the line blurs where the substance initially isn't banned, but later on it is. My possibly faulty recollection was that what McGuire and Sosa (for example) used were not banned at the time of use, and that use stopped slightly before or contemporaneously with prohibition. That wouldn't be true for Clemmons and A-Rod (again, for example), because what they were using was banned prior to and during use.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 01-29-2023, 07:38 PM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 13,043
Default

It's a weird netherworld, Frank. Steroids weren't banned but they were illegal w/o a prescription, so McGwire and Sosa and the rest of them never should have had them at all. I guess in a sense they were banned before they were banned.

Yes, I am a lawyer.

But I digress.

The first thing I thought when I saw that Gehrig (esp the LL corner) was that it was intentionally rounded, maybe to aid in flipping it or doing something else with it, like this O'Doul:



If I submit that card I get an "A" 99% of the time a "1" the other 1%.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true.

https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/

Or not...

Last edited by Exhibitman; 01-29-2023 at 07:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 01-29-2023, 07:45 PM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 13,043
Default

So these two cards are the same grade?




Yeah, that makes sense.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true.

https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/

Or not...

Last edited by Exhibitman; 01-29-2023 at 07:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01-30-2023, 12:48 AM
rhettyeakley's Avatar
rhettyeakley rhettyeakley is offline
Rhett Yeakley
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Idaho
Posts: 2,650
Default

Massively overgraded! That is a 1.5 at best, one of the worst looking 3’s you will ever see!
__________________
Check out my YouTube Videos highlighting VINTAGE CARDS https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbE..._as=subscriber

ebay store: kryvintage-->https://www.ebay.com/sch/kryvintage/...p2047675.l2562
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 01-30-2023, 01:24 AM
brianp-beme's Avatar
brianp-beme brianp-beme is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,534
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
So these two cards are the same grade?




Yeah, that makes sense.
To me it does, as it appears Ruth has been downgraded for getting second billing to Snookums.

Brian
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 01-30-2023, 07:37 AM
Gorditadogg Gorditadogg is offline
Al Stein
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
It's a weird netherworld, Frank. Steroids weren't banned but they were illegal w/o a prescription, so McGwire and Sosa and the rest of them never should have had them at all. I guess in a sense they were banned before they were banned.

Yes, I am a lawyer.

But I digress.

The first thing I thought when I saw that Gehrig (esp the LL corner) was that it was intentionally rounded, maybe to aid in flipping it or doing something else with it, like this O'Doul:



If I submit that card I get an "A" 99% of the time a "1" the other 1%.
According to Game of Shadows, Bonds began using steroids in 1998, starting with Winstrol, and by 2000 was also taking testosterone, HGH, trenbelone (a steroid used for cattle), insulin, and Clomid (a female fertility drug). That's quite a cocktail.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 01-30-2023, 08:22 AM
bcbgcbrcb bcbgcbrcb is offline
Phil Garry
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,817
Default

I believe the "compromise" on Bonds and Clemens is that both were going to be Hall of Famers, no doubt, and need to be elected sooner rather than later. However, to me, the staggering numbers for both should be taken with a grain of salt and I don't put Bonds in the top 10 all-time nor do I place Clemens nearly as high as his numbers would warrant. I think that's where we should be drawing the line, not keeping them out of the Hall, that's just plain silly. However, I would keep them out of the conversation of top 10 all-time hitters/pitchers.

Thoughts on this?
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 01-30-2023, 08:30 AM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is online now
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 34,198
Default

I like this approach...but also think they should get the dreaded asterisk next to the induction, denoting steroid era.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb View Post
I believe the "compromise" on Bonds and Clemens is that both were going to be Hall of Famers, no doubt, and need to be elected sooner rather than later. However, to me, the staggering numbers for both should be taken with a grain of salt and I don't put Bonds in the top 10 all-time nor do I place Clemens nearly as high as his numbers would warrant. I think that's where we should be drawing the line, not keeping them out of the Hall, that's just plain silly. However, I would keep them out of the conversation of top 10 all-time hitters/pitchers.

Thoughts on this?
__________________
Leon Luckey

Last edited by Leon; 01-30-2023 at 09:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 01-30-2023, 08:52 AM
Gorditadogg Gorditadogg is offline
Al Stein
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb View Post
I believe the "compromise" on Bonds and Clemens is that both were going to be Hall of Famers, no doubt, and need to be elected sooner rather than later. However, to me, the staggering numbers for both should be taken with a grain of salt and I don't put Bonds in the top 10 all-time nor do I place Clemens nearly as high as his numbers would warrant. I think that's where we should be drawing the line, not keeping them out of the Hall, that's just plain silly. However, I would keep them out of the conversation of top 10 all-time hitters/pitchers.



Thoughts on this?
I think it is a bit ridiculous to ask voters to imagine an alternate universe where players made different choices to see how their careers may have panned out. I don't believe in any case that Bonds numbers through 1997 would have put him in the Hall of Fame.

I also don't believe we should ignore the damage that PEDs did to the game of baseball, or give a pass to the players and owners that furthered it.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 01-30-2023, 09:22 AM
PhillyFan1883's Avatar
PhillyFan1883 PhillyFan1883 is offline
Connor
Connor
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 219
Default

I did not read all the post, but most of them. Another point to be made is- this card has traded many times in the last several years. People are sick of seeing the card for auction. And as many others pointed out- its a 1.5 at best.
__________________
Successful BST Transactions w/ — ezez420, Old Judge , chris counts, Moonlight Graham, Marckus99
Brian Van Horn, qed2190, danf19, BuzzD, ThomasL, nolemmings, Andretti83, soxinseven and many more.

Last edited by PhillyFan1883; 01-30-2023 at 09:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 01-30-2023, 04:57 PM
BeanTown's Avatar
BeanTown BeanTown is offline
Jay Cee
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,036
Default

It would be nice for a representative from SGC comment on the grade. I’m sure they steer clear of message boards unless they can control it like Collectors Universe.
__________________
Love Ty Cobb rare items and baseball currency from the 19th Century.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 01-30-2023, 05:19 PM
rhettyeakley's Avatar
rhettyeakley rhettyeakley is offline
Rhett Yeakley
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Idaho
Posts: 2,650
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanTown View Post
It would be nice for a representative from SGC comment on the grade. I’m sure they steer clear of message boards unless they can control it like Collectors Universe.
Agreed. The bad part is that it was “reviewed” and somehow crossed over to their new style holder! They can’t claim changing standards or anything like that when they have recently “verified” that a 3 was the accurate grade. They just did not want to be held liable for the obviously needed downgrade on a 80-100k card.
__________________
Check out my YouTube Videos highlighting VINTAGE CARDS https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbE..._as=subscriber

ebay store: kryvintage-->https://www.ebay.com/sch/kryvintage/...p2047675.l2562
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 01-30-2023, 05:29 PM
jingram058's Avatar
jingram058 jingram058 is offline
J@mes In.gram
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: In the past
Posts: 1,851
Default

I don't think they're going into the HOF in our lifetime. Maybe some future generation will see things differently. Likewise, I think there are going to be many more going into the HOF that I myself do not think of as HOFers that apparently most other people do.
__________________
James Ingram

Successful net54 purchases from/trades with:
Tere1071, Bocabirdman, 8thEastVB, GoldenAge50s, IronHorse2130, Kris19, G1911, dacubfan, sflayank, Smanzari, bocca001, eliminator, ejstel, lampertb, rjackson44, Jason19th, Cmvorce, CobbSpikedMe, Harliduck, donmuth, HercDriver, Huck, theshleps

Completed 1962 Topps
Completed 1969 Topps deckle edge
Completed 1953 Bowman color & b/w
*** Raw cards only, daddyo! ***
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 01-30-2023, 06:51 PM
Popcorn Popcorn is offline
Christopher
Chr.is Gl@sby
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 190
Default

I went the poor man’s rout and picked up a 27’ exhibit and 25’ w590. Would love to know if the w590 was actually printed in 25’

Last edited by Popcorn; 01-30-2023 at 06:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 01-30-2023, 07:04 PM
Lorewalker's Avatar
Lorewalker Lorewalker is offline
Chase
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 1,319
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Popcorn View Post
I went the poor man’s rout and picked up a 27’ exhibit and 25’ w590. Would love to know if the w590 was actually printed in 25’
I recently read two good threads on here about the W590 issue. I think even the guys who seemed to have some pretty good theories about the issue were not 100% convinced that the Gehrig could be pinned down as only a 1925 printing.
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 01-31-2023, 12:49 PM
bcbgcbrcb bcbgcbrcb is offline
Phil Garry
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,817
Default

From the independent research that I have done based on the printing font, and it’s been a while now, there was no reason why the Gehrig W590 would not have been printed in 1925 considering the player/team identifications of the other 9 cards from the Gehrig strip of 10 that I have seen. Could these have continued to have been printed beyond 1925, sure, but the same can be said for numerous other vintage issues. You kind of have to draw the line somewhere with this kind of stuff or you will drive yourself crazy. Could the Gehrig also have been printed on a different panel of 10? Maybe, I have never seen another different one though.

To me the W590 has an upside and a downside when compared to the 1925 Exhibit. It obviously fits the definition of a card (although strip cards may not be as popular as caramel, tobacco, etc.) much more precisely than the Exhibit, which is essentially a blank backed postcard. The downside is that it is categorized as a 1925-31 issue, for what that’s worth, and I think it can be pretty safely assumed that cards from this series were issued at least over multiple years so the date can never be as definitive as the ‘25 Exhibit. (But who’s to say that the Exhibit Supply Co. didn’t have leftover cards from 1925 and refilled their vending machines with them in 1926?) Anyone willing to bet their life on that not happening? You get the picture.

Last edited by bcbgcbrcb; 01-31-2023 at 12:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 01-31-2023, 06:56 PM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 13,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb View Post
From the independent research that I have done based on the printing font, and it’s been a while now, there was no reason why the Gehrig W590 would not have been printed in 1925 considering the player/team identifications of the other 9 cards from the Gehrig strip of 10 that I have seen. Could these have continued to have been printed beyond 1925, sure, but the same can be said for numerous other vintage issues. You kind of have to draw the line somewhere with this kind of stuff or you will drive yourself crazy. Could the Gehrig also have been printed on a different panel of 10? Maybe, I have never seen another different one though.

To me the W590 has an upside and a downside when compared to the 1925 Exhibit. It obviously fits the definition of a card (although strip cards may not be as popular as caramel, tobacco, etc.) much more precisely than the Exhibit, which is essentially a blank backed postcard. The downside is that it is categorized as a 1925-31 issue, for what that’s worth, and I think it can be pretty safely assumed that cards from this series were issued at least over multiple years so the date can never be as definitive as the ‘25 Exhibit. (But who’s to say that the Exhibit Supply Co. didn’t have leftover cards from 1925 and refilled their vending machines with them in 1926?) Anyone willing to bet their life on that not happening? You get the picture.
I would love to see your research, Phil. Please publish it and explain your conclusion. If you already did, I guess I missed it, so please post a link to it.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true.

https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/

Or not...
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 01-31-2023, 07:38 PM
Lorewalker's Avatar
Lorewalker Lorewalker is offline
Chase
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 1,319
Default

Here is one of the links from here on the general dating of the W590...
https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=185679

I could have sworn there was another.
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 01-31-2023, 07:42 PM
Lorewalker's Avatar
Lorewalker Lorewalker is offline
Chase
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 1,319
Default

Here is a link to a 10 card strip with Gehrig...

https://huntauctions.com/phone/image...140&lot_num=18

My edit is to add that I am not sure what, if anything, can be inferred from the boxers on that strip but with the inclusion of Hank Gowdy as a NY Giant, it closely supports Phil's theory. Gowdy was on the Giants for a minute in 1911 but would return as a back up catcher in the 1923-25 seasons.
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y

Last edited by Lorewalker; 01-31-2023 at 09:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 02-01-2023, 06:06 PM
bcbgcbrcb bcbgcbrcb is offline
Phil Garry
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,817
Default

Adam:

Any research that I did regarding the W590’s, including the Gehrig and Lindstrom cards as potential rookies was probably a decade or more ago when I was doing the HOF rookie card collection. Without recalling all of the details, I believe that the set was issued in two separate printings, one during the first year of the date range, 1925, and the other during the last year, 1931. Player/team changes factored into it as well as font type, position designations, etc. At the time I was collecting the rookies, I owned both the Exhibit and W590 Gehrig, with the first being worth around $3K and the strip card being closer to $1K so there was no self-serving purpose for me to unjustly favor one over the other for my own benefit.

If I recall correctly, in more recent years, someone maybe a Dan posted a thread documenting multiple card issues where the date(s) had been in question over the years. I don’t recall if W590 was part of that one but it would be very helpful if somebody could find and post it. I had no luck searching for it.

Taking a closer look at the 5 boxing cards, and I defer to Adam’s expertise in this area, it appears that all were at “peak” times in their careers around 1925 as opposed to 1931 so this would correspond with my theory that this strip was produced in 1925 and not the later printing. The Gowdy baseball card certainly favors this theory as well and doesn’t make sense that it would be issued as late as 1931 when he was playing in Boston for the previous two seasons.

Last edited by bcbgcbrcb; 02-01-2023 at 06:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 02-03-2023, 11:35 AM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 13,043
Default

The boxers aren't any help; all were active before and after 1925 and are in numerous sets from the era.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true.

https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/

Or not...
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 07-21-2023, 03:43 PM
MACollector MACollector is offline
member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Posts: 31
Default

Seems like the rookie prices are alive and well for nice looking ones! His PSA 3.5 sold for $206k this week at Goldin. Night and day nicer looking than the original 3 that started this thread.
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg IMG_0299.jpeg (69.9 KB, 301 views)
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 07-21-2023, 04:44 PM
BeanTown's Avatar
BeanTown BeanTown is offline
Jay Cee
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,036
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MACollector View Post
Seems like the rookie prices are alive and well for nice looking ones! His PSA 3.5 sold for $206k this week at Goldin. Night and day nicer looking than the original 3 that started this thread.
Great looking card and under valued where someone got a great deal. Some folks just don’t give Gehrig or Exibits much love. I am not one of those people.
__________________
Love Ty Cobb rare items and baseball currency from the 19th Century.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 07-21-2023, 04:48 PM
raulus raulus is offline
Nicol0 Pin.oli
 
Join Date: May 2022
Posts: 1,814
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanTown View Post
Great looking card and under valued where someone got a great deal. Some folks just don’t give Gehrig or Exibits much love. I am not one of those people.
Hi Jay - Pardon my widespread ignorance of Gehrig cards in general and this Exhibit specifically, but I'm not used to hearing the figure of $200k+ and the words "under valued" used in the same sentence. If I had been consuming a beverage while reading your post, I probably would have achieved some impressive spray.

Is the value here primarily based on this exhibit being Gehrig's rookie?
__________________
Trying to wrap up my master mays set, with just a few left:

1963 Post complete panel
1968 American Oil left side
1971 Bazooka numbered complete panel
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 07-21-2023, 05:17 PM
Republicaninmass Republicaninmass is online now
T3d $h3rm@n
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,148
Default

Unloved for years, close to 100 of them, now it's 200k.


New money is something else
__________________
"Trolling Ebay right now" ©

Always looking for signed 1952 topps as well as variations and errors
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 07-21-2023, 06:51 PM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 13,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raulus View Post
Hi Jay - Pardon my widespread ignorance of Gehrig cards in general and this Exhibit specifically, but I'm not used to hearing the figure of $200k+ and the words "under valued" used in the same sentence. If I had been consuming a beverage while reading your post, I probably would have achieved some impressive spray.

Is the value here primarily based on this exhibit being Gehrig's rookie?
Yes.

The card has gone from about $2K 25-30 years ago to the stratosphere.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true.

https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/

Or not...
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 07-21-2023, 06:59 PM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is online now
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 34,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
Yes.

The card has gone from about $2K 25-30 years ago to the stratosphere.
I bought a (now) PSA 6 raw, in about 1998 for 2600 dollars.....wish I still had it

.
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 07-21-2023, 07:29 PM
raulus raulus is offline
Nicol0 Pin.oli
 
Join Date: May 2022
Posts: 1,814
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
Yes.

The card has gone from about $2K 25-30 years ago to the stratosphere.
Totally get that.

I guess I’m not following the concept that it’s undervalued now that it’s into the stratosphere. But maybe I misunderstood that part. Maybe it used to be undervalued back when it could be had for cheap, and now it’s no longer undervalued?
__________________
Trying to wrap up my master mays set, with just a few left:

1963 Post complete panel
1968 American Oil left side
1971 Bazooka numbered complete panel

Last edited by raulus; 07-21-2023 at 07:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 07-21-2023, 09:10 PM
MACollector MACollector is offline
member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Posts: 31
Default

To me it feels like they have been discovered like the Sporting News 1916 Ruth that wasn’t as appreciated as it is today. There are so many variations of that 1916 the Gehrig is actually a lot scarcer too so I can see why prices have skyrocketed.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 07-22-2023, 12:16 PM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 13,043
Default

Is it "undervalued"? As compared to Ruth, I don't think it is. Ruth is ... Ruthian. All others fade into the background. As compared to Mantle, it gets more complicated. If you offered me a 1925 Gehrig or a 1951 Bowman/1952 Topps Mantle to have for my PC (not to flip) with comparable grades, I would take the Gehrig every day and twice on Sunday. But that is my collector, not investor, take, no doubt influenced by the fact that my favorite Mantle is the 1952 Bowman. Slipping on my investor hat, however, I gotta go with the comparably valued 1952 Topps Mantle because i think it has a higher ceiling. So, undervalued is a loaded term.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true.

https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/

Or not...

Last edited by Exhibitman; 07-22-2023 at 12:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 07-22-2023, 02:41 PM
mrreality68's Avatar
mrreality68 mrreality68 is offline
Jeffrey Kuhr
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 5,607
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
Is it "undervalued"? As compared to Ruth, I don't think it is. Ruth is ... Ruthian. All others fade into the background. As compared to Mantle, it gets more complicated. If you offered me a 1925 Gehrig or a 1951 Bowman/1952 Topps Mantle to have for my PC (not to flip) with comparable grades, I would take the Gehrig every day and twice on Sunday. But that is my collector, not investor, take, no doubt influenced by the fact that my favorite Mantle is the 1952 Bowman. Slipping on my investor hat, however, I gotta go with the comparably valued 1952 Topps Mantle because i think it has a higher ceiling. So, undervalued is a loaded term.
I would be happy for either the Gehrig or the Mantle which ever do not choose.

Both cards have upside potential and both are great cards. But since I am a pre 1939 collector I would prefer the Gehrig.
__________________
Thanks all

Jeff Kuhr

https://www.flickr.com/photos/144250058@N05/

Looking for
1920 Heading Home Ruth Cards
1933 Uncle Jacks Candy Babe Ruth Card
1921 Frederick Foto Ruth
Joe Jackson Cards 1916 Advertising Backs
1910 Old Mills Joe Jackson
1914 Boston Garter Joe Jackson
1915 Cracker Jack Joe Jackson
1911 Pinkerton Joe Jackson
Shoeless Joe Jackson Autograph
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 07-22-2023, 08:22 PM
MACollector MACollector is offline
member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
Is it "undervalued"? As compared to Ruth, I don't think it is. Ruth is ... Ruthian. All others fade into the background. As compared to Mantle, it gets more complicated. If you offered me a 1925 Gehrig or a 1951 Bowman/1952 Topps Mantle to have for my PC (not to flip) with comparable grades, I would take the Gehrig every day and twice on Sunday. But that is my collector, not investor, take, no doubt influenced by the fact that my favorite Mantle is the 1952 Bowman. Slipping on my investor hat, however, I gotta go with the comparably valued 1952 Topps Mantle because i think it has a higher ceiling. So, undervalued is a loaded term.
Agree totally! It’s not Ruth and Ruth will sell for more all else equal but I just think it’s become discovered more like the Ruth rookie was years ago now.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 07-23-2023, 01:47 PM
ricktmd ricktmd is offline
Rick Clemens
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: California
Posts: 563
Default

A somewhat overlooked mistake here is the " new holder" . If it were in an old PSA holder getting it in a current PSA holder definitely adds value. Not the case with SGC and for sure not in this situation. It looks like a somewhat typical, older overgraded SGC card. For sure SGC and PSA are grading much tougher than they use to. While I also agree demand has softened, a new holder is a good stategy before auctioning a PSA card but probably not with SGC
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 07-23-2023, 08:48 PM
rjackson44's Avatar
rjackson44 rjackson44 is offline
octavio ranzola
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Manhattan nyc,congers ny
Posts: 12,053
Default Love exhibits

Love. Mine
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_1144.jpg (195.6 KB, 158 views)
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 07-23-2023, 09:07 PM
Lorewalker's Avatar
Lorewalker Lorewalker is offline
Chase
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 1,319
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leon View Post
I bought a (now) PSA 6 raw, in about 1998 for 2600 dollars.....wish I still had it

.
OMG, my condolences. Kudos for being early though.


.
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y

Last edited by Leon; 07-25-2023 at 06:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 07-25-2023, 06:57 PM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is online now
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 34,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorewalker View Post
OMG, my condolences. Kudos for being early though.
.
At the time, I sold it for a record price, 10k....that's life.
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 07-25-2023, 07:47 PM
doug.goodman doug.goodman is offline
Doug Goodman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the road again...
Posts: 4,550
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman View Post
It's a weird netherworld, Frank. Steroids weren't banned but they were illegal w/o a prescription...[/IMG]
That doesn't sound like a weird netherworld, it sounds like a place where you could have easily answered any critics by showing your prescription.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 07-26-2023, 08:01 AM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 13,043
Default

Maybe I am too lawyerish, Doug. What I meant was that if it is illegal but not against the rules of the job, it inhabits a gray area between employer sanctionable and non-sanctionable misconduct. My personal view is that illegal activity is always grounds for dismissal but I appreciate that the line grays out with some offenses. Illegality is differentiated into what legal theorists call malum in se and malum prohibitum offenses. Malum in se offenses are things that no civilization ever tolerates: murder, rape, arson, pineapple on pizza, etc. Malum prohibitum offenses are those that are wrong only because a particular society has labeled them as wrong, while others do not. Marijuana is a perfect example. What I can buy and get high on here in Cali at a nice storefront next to a falafel place will get me arrested in Texas. In baseball 'law' steroids were more the latter: not against the rules but definitely against the law without a scrip. Does a team fire a player for something not against the rules (malum in se) but illegal activity, just not the sort of illegal that would be universally condemned. That's where money and marketing come in. Trevor Bauer got run out of MLB over an accusation of a malum in se activity that he was not even tried and convicted of doing because the "ick" factor of the behavior (even if consensual as he claims) itself was too ugly for the game's marketers to tolerate. MLB has lost enough audience share already without being seen to coddle pervs, even if not convicted; call it the Michael Jackson Rule: the fact that he was in a position to be accused of kiddie fiddling in the first place destroys his marketability for a sizable number of fans, so if you can, you get rid of him. Or Kapernick: basically got blacklisted in the NFL for speech because it really ticked off a lot of the fans. Yet, a guy who shoots up steroids and gets caught gets a suspension...because fans like how guys play when they are jacked on 'roids. Same with cards: lots of collectors don't care whether some honest wear is removed because they like the results; others pitch a hissy fit over using a glasses cleaning cloth to remove wax from a card front. As long as the money flows, the net result will be nothing. This is America: it's all about the Benjamins.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true.

https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/

Or not...

Last edited by Exhibitman; 07-26-2023 at 08:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 07-29-2023, 03:12 PM
etsmith etsmith is offline
edward
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 231
Default

It would be interesting to see someone do a projection of what Barry Bonds final numbers would have been based on his pre-steroid numbers. I don't think people who used steroids should be in the Hall of Fame though.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1925 Gehrig Frank A Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 20 03-06-2018 07:27 PM
1925 Gehrig Frank A Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 2 02-26-2018 07:45 AM
Gehrig 1925 Exhibit MattyC Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 82 08-13-2017 08:23 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:01 PM.


ebay GSB