December 2023 Pickup Thread

[Eric72]

One of the two cards I picked up at the Philly Show yesterday. The other was a T206, which I'll post over on that pickup thread.

There's another '56 Topps card which should hit my mailbox in a few days. I'll post that one when it arrives.

[GasHouseGang]

Really nice looking "3". Congratulations on that pickup. I've included the original action photo used on that card.

[Beercan collector]

That’s a terrific three .
I found another good buy it now on eBay .
Kurtzkardz had more-than-fair price on this one

[Lucas00]

Nice pickups already so far!

Here is my pickup, a 1955 Hunters Wiener of Red Schoendienst, missing the top part about collecting all of the cards but still more than happy to have one this complete.
I'm now only missing his '54.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Beercan collector

That’s a terrific three .
I found another good buy it now on eBay .
Kurtzkardz had more-than-fair price on this one

Very nice. Stan's later Topps issues remain ridiculously undervalued.

[gunboat82]

I was shut out of the REA auction because I can't stay up past midnight, but I added these this month.

[RCMcKenzie]

Nice cards, all. Here's Topps artwork for Fred Lynn rookie card.

[ValKehl]

.

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by gunboat82

I was shut out of the REA auction because I can't stay up past midnight, but I added these this month.

Great pick ups, Mike, but I encourage you to post them in the pre-War forum, rather than the post-War forum.

[butchie_t]

.... And that is progressive proofs. Especially progressive proofs, they just looks cool to me and are fun to collect and add to each year of Topps Set I have. When I can find them anyway.

I have been watching this series of 72 Tim Cullen PPs on eBay for a very long time. They came into a good range for me to pull the trigger on a couple of weeks ago and now I have them in my PC. WooT!!!

These were part of the Guernsey's Topps Archive Auction a long time ago. It is interesting to me that the SGC flip is in silver and not the normal green. Not sure if that means anything to anyone, I just thought it interesting. Anyway, thanks to Jeff W. I have these now.

And they will be removed from their encapsulation and added to the binder. That is how I roll........

And I forgot to mention, Tim Cullen, Senator, so score on that part too. I only wish Topps would not have airbrushed his hat for these PP's.

Butch

[jchcollins]

Finally have these back in hand this afternoon. My Priority package from SGC had sat at the USPS distribution center 30 miles up the road for three solid days, and I was starting to get worried...

The Aaron I thought could have been a 1, but it has tape and paper loss on the back. Still a great looking card that now looks even better in a tux. The Ryans are part of my early base card run that I've been meaning to get holdered up forever. The '71 Seaver is my head scratcher for this order: Part of an EX-MT+ overall set I bought a couple years ago; I thought that one was going to be at least an 8 with a shot at higher. Corners are pack fresh to put it mildly. Oh well. Love them all!







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JollyElm]

Wow, nice stuff!!!
Real hard to find a 1969 Ryan so nicely centered. Well done. And you're preaching to the choir about the 1971s. Is there a single human being who has ever gotten the 'correct' and deserved grade on a 1971 card??? I think not. Those black bordered bee-yotches are a nightmare for all submitters.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Wow, nice stuff!!!

Real hard to find a 1969 Ryan so nicely centered. Well done. And you're preaching to the choir about the 1971s. Is there a single human being who has ever gotten the 'correct' and deserved grade on a 1971 card??? I think not. Those black bordered bee-yotches are a nightmare for all submitters.

Thanks Elms.

Attached below is a pic of the back of the '69 Ryan. PD to say the least, and he also has print dots on his sleeves on the front. But agreed, the centering and also the lack of the "missing pixel" on the front made me go for this one anyway when I bought it raw a few years ago. Also the image is focused. All too often on the '69 - Nolan has lipstick on or multiple sets of bushy eyebrows. I think if this card didn't have the PD it would have been at least a 5.5.

Couldn't agree with you more on the '71's. And sorry, but no grading company - including SGC - knows what do do with them. This Seaver is considerably sharper than a duplicate '71 Clemente #630 that I sent them in the previous order. They gave that card a 7.

Either way I will take it, these cards are all for my PC.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Thanks Elms.

Attached below is a pic of the back of the '69 Ryan. PD to say the least, and he also has print dots on his sleeves on the front. But agreed, the centering and also the lack of the "missing pixel" on the front made me go for this one anyway when I bought it raw a few years ago. Also the image is focused. All too often on the '69 - Nolan has lipstick on or multiple sets of bushy eyebrows. I think if this card didn't have the PD it would have been at least a 5.5.

Couldn't agree with you more on the '71's. And sorry, but no grading company - including SGC - knows what do do with them. This Seaver is considerably sharper than a duplicate '71 Clemente #630 that I sent them in the previous order. They gave that card a 7.

Either way I will take it, these cards are all for my PC.

Plus, there's the additional charm of him pretending to have just thrown the ball...yet, it's still sitting in his mitt. What a silly goose!!!

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Nice stuff, John!

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Plus, there's the additional charm of him pretending to have just thrown the ball...yet, it's still sitting in his mitt. What a silly goose!!!

#Deleted. Speaking of silly gooses, apparently I can't remember what I post from one night to the next morning.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by butchie_t

It is interesting to me that the SGC flip is in silver and not the normal green. Not sure if that means anything to anyone, I just thought it interesting. Anyway, thanks to Jeff W. I have these now.

SGC ditched the remaining green with the last major branding overhaul on the flips, which if memory serves was in 2018. The new regular labels where yours are silver are just black.

Very cool proofs! I'm just trying to put together the base '72 Topps set, and not even halfway through that.

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

SGC ditched the remaining green with the last major branding overhaul on the flips, which if memory serves was in 2018. The new regular labels where yours are silver are just black.

Very cool proofs! I'm just trying to put together the base '72 Topps set, and not even halfway through that.

I had a fun time putting that set together. Thankfully, I drug about half the set with me everywhere I moved. The half I did have I actually bought way back in 72. I finally finished it a couple of years ago. Just took a bit over 40 years to complete it. Damn, I’m old.

Enjoy the quest. And thanks for the post.

Butch.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by butchie_t

I had a fun time putting that set together. Thankfully, I drug about half the set with me everywhere I moved. The half I did have I actually bought way back in 72. I finally finished it a couple of years ago. Just took a bit over 40 years to complete it. Damn, I’m old.

Enjoy the quest. And thanks for the post.

Butch.

I was born in 1977, so when I was a kid in this hobby, roughly 1986 to '93 - I always thought of cards like '72 as the gaudy, recent past. (As opposed to the cool, vintage past which for me at the time meant the 1950's). I wanted about as much to do with those cards as I did the green appliances and orange carpet they no doubt originally shared households with. It wasn't until I got back into cards as an adult in my late 30's that something different clicked in my head and I found '72 Topps desirable. Today, I think it's the most unique design of the decade - and it's easily my favorite. Er, well not including the anomaly that is 1971 Topps and all things related to those ridiculous black-bordered cards. I love those as well...

[Eric72]

I just picked up the last "key" card (Jackie/Mantle/Mays/Clemente/Koufax/Aaron/Williams) for my 1956 Topps set.



Next up for me will be the checklists and guys like Ernie Banks, Pee Wee Reese, and Whitey Ford.

[JollyElm]

Yowza!! It's (literally) the wild west out here!!*
Had a high time at a local show yesterday, and made some nice pick-ups with an eye towards my next SGC submission(s), so I negotiated the purchase of these pretty sweet, ungraded greats (plus got a less-than-past-eBay-sales price on the 1960 Topps #200 Willie Mays, so I had no choice but to jump on it):
1971 Topps #630 Roberto Clemente
1961 Topps #388 Roberto Clemente
1961 Topps #141 Billy Williams HOF RC
1969 Topps #120 Pete Rose

1223Pickups.jpg



*Details to follow in my 'Observations from the Card Show Front Lines' thread.

[Casey2296]

-
Haven't picked up any postwar recently but added this one from Huggins and Scott.
-

[jchcollins]

So. Kind of a surprise, kind of not - this wound up happening at LCS #2 yesterday. I am focusing set collecting efforts more towards 1963 and away from ‘67 lately - as I realized in the end it’s a lot easier to pay $10 or $15 for no-name high numbers than it is $100 or more. You’ll notice this is well below my usual grading standard for postwar vintage. Whatever, maybe it’s getting older as a collector, maybe it’s something else, but I’m just not spending $2K or more on a PSA 5 or 6 range example. This card won’t win any beauty contests, but here’s one of life’s true facts about the Pete Rose rookie card - neither will most high grade copies! The ‘63 floating heads are among Topps’ stranger choices I guess. I don’t think the cards are downright ugly, but it’s hard to make a case the other way that they are gorgeous as well. The Rose, as has other examples of rookie cards throughout history - became iconic regardless while not necessarily being the Mona Lisa. While this is no doubt a well deserved 1 (multiple creases, corners are gone, surface crap) I think it still retains decent eye appeal for what it is. Either way - this represents a huge check mark on my list for ‘63 Topps. Of course when discussing that set, the invariable question comes around - “Do you have the Rose?” Also trying to forget at the moment the MUCH nicer copy of this card I briefly had for about the same price point circa 5 years ago. Oy…




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[YazFenway08]

i recently started picking up some Daubert cards and have always collected oddball Dale Alexander…so i was thrilled to pick up a set of the 1974 Bob Parker “2nd Best” cards.

i have been around for more than a minute, and i never knew these cards existed. i just think they are super cool…they feel and look vintage, you get a couple of Ruth’s and Cobbs in the set…they remind me a lot of the old Signal Oli PCL cards from the late 40s.

[JollyElm]

Man, those look great, and the onomatopeiac(?) usage of "WHOK" is phenomenal!!!!!!

[Harliduck]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

So. Kind of a surprise, kind of not - this wound up happening at LCS #2 yesterday. I am focusing set collecting efforts more towards 1963 and away from ‘67 lately - as I realized in the end it’s a lot easier to pay $10 or $15 for no-name high numbers than it is $100 or more. You’ll notice this is well below my usual grading standard for postwar vintage. Whatever, maybe it’s getting older as a collector, maybe it’s something else, but I’m just not spending $2K or more on a PSA 5 or 6 range example. This card won’t win any beauty contests, but here’s one of life’s true facts about the Pete Rose rookie card - neither will most high grade copies! The ‘63 floating heads are among Topps’ stranger choices I guess. I don’t think the cards are downright ugly, but it’s hard to make a case the other way that they are gorgeous as well. The Rose, as has other examples of rookie cards throughout history - became iconic regardless while not necessarily being the Mona Lisa. While this is no doubt a well deserved 1 (multiple creases, corners are gone, surface crap) I think it still retains decent eye appeal for what it is. Either way - this represents a huge check mark on my list for ‘63 Topps. Of course when discussing that set, the invariable question comes around - “Do you have the Rose?” Also trying to forget at the moment the MUCH nicer copy of this card I briefly had for about the same price point circa 5 years ago. Oy…




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Congrats on the Rose card John! It's funny, I've owned two of these in my life, and to date, they are the only ones I've ever seen in person...such an iconic card regardless of the floating heads or condition. First time I put the set together I had an SGC 5...and it cost me $500...I then sold the set...immediately regretted it...and when I put it back together I ended up buying an SGC 4...and now looking at comps, the $900 I paid was a good deal...well, now. Love yours....COOL. The 63 set is fun to put together...lots of pesky floating head cards like the Dalkowski (SP?)...and the Stargell...Oliva...even some minor stars...just lots of cool rookie cards. Clemente in the highs is cool too...

[Harliduck]

Crappy story...was going through some sets the other night only to find that the last page of my 1958 Topps set was MISSING. Only explanation is the page was stolen...cards and sheet missing. Made me sick to my stomach. Could have happened in the last 2 or 3 months...and we have had lots of visitors to the house...and with 4 older daughters they have had guests over. We have one guess...but...

Anyway, had to replace that last page...most were easy and I quickly just bought some nice EX BINs...picked up a nice Spahn AS...the big one is the Mantle AS. Won this last night in an auction...a little OC and looks like some erased pencil on top, but nice enough as it matches the VG, VG/EX of my set. I was shocked what I won it for...went to bed with a much higher bid and woke up to quite a shock. Anyway...now only need the Aaron AS to be back to a complete set...

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

Congrats on the Rose card John! It's funny, I've owned two of these in my life, and to date, they are the only ones I've ever seen in person...such an iconic card regardless of the floating heads or condition. First time I put the set together I had an SGC 5...and it cost me $500...I then sold the set...immediately regretted it...and when I put it back together I ended up buying an SGC 4...and now looking at comps, the $900 I paid was a good deal...well, now. Love yours....COOL. The 63 set is fun to put together...lots of pesky floating head cards like the Dalkowski (SP?)...and the Stargell...Oliva...even some minor stars...just lots of cool rookie cards. Clemente in the highs is cool too...

Thanks John. I briefly owned a PSA 5 of the Rose probably 3 years ago; sold it for about what I just paid for this one, and of course regretted that. Sometimes lower grade cards carry a bit of character with the patina, and at least for right now, that's how I feel about this one. The rest of my set will be nicer, but the card still carries eye appeal. Later on, as my interests become more specific I might consider upgrading it if I consolidate some of the rest of my collection. As with the rest of the high number big rookie cards from the 60's, it's still an awfully expensive card even in a PSA 1.

Yeah I love '63 overall, just an iconic design and among the most colorful of the decade. '67 might have the best pictures, but to me '63 is the best combo of design and pictures in the 1960's. Funny you mention the Dalkowski, that's on it's way to me from ebay right now, actually. I have most of the other major stars (Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Clemente, Koufax...) and need to dig in on the commons now. The Clemente high # is very cool, great pose. It may be my favorite card in the whole set.

Happy Holidays!

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

Crappy story...was going through some sets the other night only to find that the last page of my 1958 Topps set was MISSING. Only explanation is the page was stolen...cards and sheet missing. Made me sick to my stomach. Could have happened in the last 2 or 3 months...and we have had lots of visitors to the house...and with 4 older daughters they have had guests over. We have one guess...but...

Anyway, had to replace that last page...most were easy and I quickly just bought some nice EX BINs...picked up a nice Spahn AS...the big one is the Mantle AS. Won this last night in an auction...a little OC and looks like some erased pencil on top, but nice enough as it matches the VG, VG/EX of my set. I was shocked what I won it for...went to bed with a much higher bid and woke up to quite a shock. Anyway...now only need the Aaron AS to be back to a complete set...

Nice replacement Mantle, but that sucks if your cards were stolen!

I got lucky yesterday - forgot the cleaning crew people were coming, and left a pile of nice 63's sitting out on my desk in the guest room / office. Probably 500 dollars worth of cards easy, including a graded Koufax.

When I got home after 5, the cards were all there, right where I left them. I knew we trusted these folks when we hired them, but glad that trust still seems well placed. My cards are insured and usually well put away, but sometimes you realize something like this and it makes you feel uneasy...

[jchcollins]

Last card of the year for me, Clark - and it’s a big one. There has been some debate in the hobby lately about what constitutes a “grail card”, but I can tell you this meets the definition for me, a Cub fan now in his 34th year of following the team.

Wasn’t sure if I was going to be able to make this happen in ‘23 given some of the other stuff you have seen here, but this one had been at LCS #2 (the one about half an hour away…) for some time and I had my eye on it. The problem was it started out considerably overpriced. Finally was able to persuade the owner to come down to what I considered “reasonable” for what it is, even if that wasn’t necessarily the deal of the century. I was over it by this point, and just wanted the card.

I’m generally a color / focus / image and surface guy over centering, so yes - while this one displays the typical “name pushed to the top” that you will find on a large percentage of these cards - I had decided some time back that this was not going to be my main criteria. I didn’t want a miscut one, and this example - while perhaps barely meeting that requirement - does. The name and team logo are all there. ‘54 Topps is such a weird set for centering to start with, what with the missing top border, and design elements (Ernie’s butt in the inset picture on this one) intentionally hanging out on to the borders. Also as a bit of bonus - hard to tell maybe, but the lettering itself at the top of Ernie’s name is not cutoff as you see with so many of these, even high grade examples. The background here is a bright, clean white - not dingy, and the color and focus just really pop, print quality is astounding. For a VG range card, there are also no creases or wrinkles that I can find.

Not a perfect card by any stretch of the imagination of course, but very clean and I’m very happy with it; and I have always loved the PSA half grades. Merry Christmas to me! I hope all of you have a very merry holiday whatever you are celebrating, and that your cardboard satisfaction goals in ‘23 were met. Mine certainly were, and I’m thankful for that.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mark70Z]

Originally Posted by butchie_t

.... And that is progressive proofs. Especially progressive proofs, they just looks cool to me and are fun to collect and add to each year of Topps Set I have. When I can find them anyway.

I have been watching this series of 72 Tim Cullen PPs on eBay for a very long time. They came into a good range for me to pull the trigger on a couple of weeks ago and now I have them in my PC. WooT!!!

These were part of the Guernsey's Topps Archive Auction a long time ago. It is interesting to me that the SGC flip is in silver and not the normal green. Not sure if that means anything to anyone, I just thought it interesting. Anyway, thanks to Jeff W. I have these now.

And they will be removed from their encapsulation and added to the binder. That is how I roll........

And I forgot to mention, Tim Cullen, Senator, so score on that part too. I only wish Topps would not have airbrushed his hat for these PP's.

Butch

Really like the progressive proofs. Jeff W., on eBay, had some ‘75 Topps Brooks proofs, but I just couldn’t afford and someone else picked them up. I collect Brooks so I try to pick up things related and proofs fit the bill; they just hardly ever show up and when they do it’s typically out of my price range.

What gets me is that currently SGC will not put “progressive proof”. Why? Who knows.

[Harliduck]

Nice Banks John!!! Beats my 1.5...

And yes...I too have a house keeper, but highly doubt she knows or cares...but...frankly the sheet they took over everything else either shows they have no idea...or smart cause they took something that may not be noticed. Anyhow...almost have now received the page back...they are now trickling in...

[luciobar1980]

Sweet '56 Clemente. One of the coolest cards out there IMO.

[Casey2296]

-
Ive been on the hunt for this card for quite a while now. Could never find one with decent centering, registration, condition, no print marks, etc. This is about as close I think I can get.
Happy to add it to my PC, I think it is one of the best Feller images available.
-

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

-
Ive been on the hunt for this card for quite a while now. Could never find one with decent centering, registration, condition, no print marks, etc. This is about as close I think I can get.
Happy to add it to my PC, I think it is one of the best Feller images available.
-

That's a beauty, Phil - congrats! I think this is one of the best looking cards in the 1950 Bowman set.