1965 Topps All-Star Cards

They just don't exist. You know, 1965 is probably my favorite design of the Topps 1960s, and yet for whatever the reason, it was the one year that didn't include combo cards. It also didn't include all-star cards, which made sense at the time, I guess.

But all-star cards and Topps go together like ham and cheese, like Marshmallow Fluff and Wonder Bread. It's odd to me that the company didn't include separate all-star cards—or even an all-star emblem on regular cards from 1963 to 1967. It makes no sense, especially when you consider that Topps' set checklists got larger as the decade wore on. It could've been easy to add a subset, and even easier to do an emblem on the players' respective regular cards. Regular-card designs from these years allowed a little wiggle room, as seen with the Topps All-Star Rookie trophy, begun in 1961 and used throughout the decade.

It's with this background that I present my take on the 1965 all-star card. I chose to do an emblem rather than a subset. There were some great players in the 1964 All-Star Game starting lineups, and at least one guy—Ron Hunt—who would be appreciated more today if his all-star status had been recognized in some lasting way.

I will post the other 17 cards to our Facebook page in the next few days...

Best Set Countdown: 21 – 18

Over the past few days, I’ve been taking a nice break from baseball card writing. I took in a show at the Holy Cross [Abandoned Catholic] School on West 43rd Street yesterday, which was great. I stocked up on cheap star cards from 1977 – 1984, including a nice 1983 Fleer Sandberg rookie and that Aurelio Rodriguez from the 1969 set (you know, the one that’s really the bat boy). I also ordered some old packs from Burbank Sportscards, which arrived yesterday. But mostly I spent my time thinking about what the real difference is between the three update/rookie/traded sets from 1986.

21. 1986 Fleer Update

And you know what? I didn’t really come to any new conclusions. Donruss was a rookies set, so it didn’t include vets. Fleer had some players that Topps didn’t have (like Tommy John), and Topps had some that Fleer didn’t have (like Tom Seaver). Like its regular issue set, Topps Traded couldn’t keep a grasp on its value, and Fleer and Donruss could. Same old stuff I knew before I started. Really, determining the best of these sets comes down to which design resonates more.

I’ve already talked about the design of the Fleer and Donruss issues from 1986, and my feelings extend to their respective rookie/update sets. It may have been hard to keep those corners sharp, but if we’re putting their designs up against 1986 Topps, the Fleer-Donruss tag team will lose every time. Even if the match is held in a steel cage. Even if Fleer hits Topps over the head with an illegal metal folding chair. Even if Donruss goes in with Topps as friends and Donruss betrays Topps in the ring. And yes, even if Gorilla Monsoon says there’s no way Topps gets out of this one alive; Topps does get out alive, it sweats all over Mean Gene in the post-match interview and yes, it does send flowers to Fleer and Donruss in the hospital. In fact, here’s how they rank: 1. Topps Traded, 2. Donruss Rookies, 3. Fleer Update. End of story.

20. 1988 Topps

I would like to go on record and say that 1988 is one of the most underrated Topps sets of the 1980s, and you can base that decision on a great checklist, or those fantastic Team Leaders cards, or because it had one of the best All-Star card designs of the decade. Or you can base this decision purely on the photography. Crisp, dynamic; card after card featuring a great action shot or a clean headshot. Topps photography (hell, baseball card photography, regardless of manufacturer) sucked for many years, with maybe under 100 cards total that you could agree featured great photos (amassed fromthe random years along the timeline featuring good photography (that was straight-up photography, not colored over like in 1952, 53 or 55): 1954, 1957, 1960, 1961, 1965, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1974, 1985, 1986). But in the 1988 set there are literally hundreds of great photos. I can picture a few of them in my head without prompt: the iconic Mattingly (him looking skyward, following the arc of a sure hit (or at least a long fly)), the powerful Clemens at the end of a windup, Brett’s massive frame in smooth follow-through, the cocksure McGwire, the pure hitting motion of Boggs, the hopeful Al Leiter (and pseudo-Leiter) in a shroud of deep blue dusk, the glory of Dave LaPoint, the King of the Airbrushed Card; even the chainlink fence behind him was airbrushed in (the background was probably originally the Oval Office, the photo taken on the day that outgoing President Reagan made it a priority to award Senior Superlatives and LaPoint somehow beat Meadowlark Lemon for Best Smile. And by the way, aren't the Globetrotters always turning up at the White House? It's odd, really...they should be made Ambassadors, and not just 'of the game', because that's lame, but real ambassadors to a country in Europe, like Belgium or somewhere). Anyway, the photography lends itself well to a lyrical wax.

Okay, so photography aside you probably think this set is ranked way too high: you think it’s too bland a design (a mix of the 1967 team name dropped out over the background and the 1966 mini banner in a corner), that there are really no major rookies and practically no subsets. I would argue that, despite everything I’ve said in the past about the make-up of a strong set, 1988 Topps is the exception that proves the rule: it does have a weak rookie class. Tom Glavine, Ken Caminiti, Doug Jones—this is the definition of weak (did you notice that the third guy mentioned is Doug Jones? He of the Sam Elliott Cowboy Mustache?
I wasn’t even aware the man was ever young enough to have had a rookie card. I thought he just appeared one day…) But it also possesses the first regular issues for Fred McGriff, Matt Williams, David Cone; and second years of McGwire, Bonds, Bonilla, Bo Jackson, Will Clark and the rest of the strong rookie class of 1986-87.

And if you think that there are not enough subset cards, consider this. The set has six subsets: Turn Back the Clock, Future Stars, Record Breakers, All-Stars, Team Leaders and All-Star Rookies. If you look at the 10 Topps regular issue sets of the 1980s, it has an above average amount.

1980: 5 (Highlights, Future Stars, Team Cards, League Leaders, All-Stars (AS denoted on regular cards))
1981: 6 (League Leaders, Future Stars, Team Cards, Post-Season, Record Breakers, All-Stars (AS denoted on regular cards))
1982: 6 (Highlights, Team Leaders, Future Stars, League Leaders, All-Stars, In Action)
1983: 5 (Record Breakers, Team Leaders, Super Veterans, All-Stars, League Leaders)
1984: 5 (Highlights, Team Leaders, All-Stars, Active Leaders, League Leaders)
1985: 5 (Record Breakers, Father/Son, Team USA, All-Stars, #1 Draft Picks)
1986: 5 (Record Breakers, Pete Rose Hero Worship, All-Stars, Turn Back the Clock, Team Leaders)
1987: 6 (All-Stars, All-Star Rookies, Future Stars, Record Breakers, Team Leaders, Turn Back the Clock)
1988: 6 (Team Leaders, All-Stars, Turn Back the Clock, Future Stars, All-Star Rookies, Record Breakers)
1989: 7 (Record Breakers, All-Stars, All-Star Rookies, Draft Picks, Future Stars, Team Leaders, Turn Back the Clock)

If to you subsets are a necessary evil, and the number of them that a set possesses is directly responsible for that set’s level of weakness, then less, for you, is more. But I argue (and have argued before) that subsets are a good thing, that sets thrive when there’s more than one card of the better players, or special cards of promising rookies or even of someone like Casey Candaele (’88 All-Star Rookies represent!).

As to value, this set is worthless, and deservedly so. As stated before, there is no real rookie class to speak of and everybody knows that second-year cards do not hold a candle to rookies in terms of value. But all these things do not hinder the set’s worthiness as a fun, collectible set. 1981 nor 1984 have any real value. Hell, no Topps set after 1985 has enjoyed any real, lasting monetary value, but valueless cards do not a bad set make.

And one last thing about the design: I don’t think it’s ugly or bland. If anything, I would call it tastefully minimal. It rivals Topps design between 1983 and 1986: there is practically nothing that gets in the way of the photograph (not even the team name, which was a hark back to the '84 bustin' out, head-through-the-window headshot). And when we’re talking about great photography, at least Topps knew enough not to screw it up with extraneous design.

19. 1982 Topps Traded

This traded set is one of the best ever, and not because of the obvious Ripken. This set is awesome because it possesses the first card of Ozzie Smith as a Cardinal (and thus Garry Templeton as a Padre), an A-1 hallmark card from the early Eighties. In fact, if we were to tear a page from the Big Book of Traded Card Milestones, I would bet that this card is up in the Top 5.

Top 10 Traded Cards of Veterans. Ever.
1. Frank Robinson, 1972 Topps
2. Steve Carlton, 1972 Topps
3. Joe Morgan, 1972 Topps
4. Ozzie Smith, 1982 Topps Traded
5. Juan Marichal, 1974 Topps
6. Pete Rose, 1984 Fleer Update
7. Carlton Fisk, 1981 Topps Traded
8. Reggie Jackson, 1982 Topps Traded
9. Oscar Gamble, 1976 Topps Traded
10. Dennis Eckersley, 1987 Topps Traded

This set also succeeds in making the drab 1982 design a little less than drab, if only because, as with other Topps Traded sets, the colors a just a little bit stronger, the card stock is a little bit brighter and the players seem a little less bored.

18. 1986 Donruss Rookies

You know it’s funny, but what the 1982 Topps Traded set was to veterans (featuring Ozzie, Reggie, Gaylord Perry and other luminaries such as Vida Blue, Chet Lemon and Fergie Jenkins, Bob Boone and George Foster), the 1986 Donruss Rookies set was to, well, rookies. Seriously, all personal favorites aside, was 1986 not one of the best crops of rookies in the decade? If not the best? I bring this up because traditionally a good traded/update set features a balanced offering of rookies and veterans. It’s why 1984 shines, and why 1985 flops. But 1986…shit man, 1986 didn’t need any fucking veterans to succeed. Look at this list: Wally Joyner, Bobby Bonilla, Ruben Sierra, Bo Jackson, Will Clark, Jose Canseco, Kevin Mitchell, Barry Bonds, Andres Galarraga, Todd Worrell, Pete Incaviglia, Mitch Williams, Doug Drabek, John Kruk…it just goes on and on. I didn’t even mention Dan Plesac, Cory Snyder or John Cangelosi!

True, the inclusion of Galarraga, Snyder and Canseco should technically hurt the standing of this set (because all were included in the regular 1986 set; Canseco’s Rated Rookie was the Mona Lisa of baseball cards of the 1980s), but they don’t. The ‘Griffey Factor’ couldn’t possibly matter here, simply because the other cards in the set are just too overpowering a combination.

The only years that even remotely compete are 1984 and 1988. The former has two Hall of Fame rookies in Clemens and Puckett (which only one company capitalized on), plus Gooden, Saberhagen, Jimmy Key, Mark Langston and others; 1988 has Alomar, Grace, Ron Gant, Jim Abbott, Brady Anderson, Andy Benes, Jay Buhner, Charles Nagy, Black Jack McDowell and Tino Martinez (and really most of them are on the Team USA Olympic cards included in Topps Traded; 1988 Fleer Update? 1988 Donruss Rookies? I don’t think I’d take a bullet for either set).

Checklist aside, this set ranks higher than the Fleer Update because Donruss was the premium issue of 1986. But it doesn’t rank higher than the Topps Traded issue because 1986 Topps Traded was (to me anyway) one of the cornerstone sets of the decade.


Coming Soon: #17 – 13

Card Critic's Countdown: 1948 to 1979

It's time to start this countdown. And I know, I've been putting this off for a while. But I haven't exactly been sitting around doing nothing (though I have been doing plenty of that too). I've been doing a lot of thinking, thinking that needs to be done now before I'm knee-deep into this thing and I find myself having to defend a set that isn't generally regarded as a 'classic'. Here are a few things I've come up with and some ground rules for the listing and reasoning in general.

This is a post-war countdown. And the problem with comparing post-war sets is that there are three distinct eras: pre-Mantle, Mantle, and post-Mantle. When it comes to ranking the merits of a set, the most gut of gut reactions is to side with the Mantle and rank it higher than those sets without. To quote William Shatner in Airplane! II, he's the big man, the top dog, the big cheese--how can you even fairly assess and rank the 'star power' of a set like 1973 Topps against one like 1962 Topps? It's not fair. That is, unless we determine a value system to the players in the set, assess them by how they did the year before, the level of their regional influence, and whether or not they were national star quality. Luckily, we don't have to do all that extra work. We're talking about classic Topps here (mostly), and classic Topps sets have already done this for us with their numbering system.

For example, from 1948 to 1953 there wasn't a clear-cut Mantle equivalent. From 1954 to 1957 Topps' Mantle was Ted Williams, and from 1959 to 1969, Mantle was Mantle. 1970 and beyond it gets tricky again, with no one stand out, though in 1977, Topps christened George Brett it's Mantle for the year. Anyway, I'd rather not get too bogged down in this right now. Just remember that I have no qualms about ranking a set without a Mantle higher than one with if it's a stronger set.

In other words, the sets in this countdown (like the sets ranked in the 1980s countdown) are not seeded by personal likes or dislikes (with the exception of the design element). Also, and this is important, the sets listed here are not ranked by value. Card value will rarely be mentioned, and does not have any bearing on the ranking of a set. Case in point: I have not ranked the 1966 Topps set #38 (out of 47) because there are very few high-value cards (high value = over $400, Mantle era pricing). I have it ranked that low because the design is really very average, the rookie crop is less than stellar, and the rookie that the set is generally known for (the Palmer) was double-printed, so everybody and their brother had a copy. Also, when you review the checklist, the set borders on mundane. It's incredible that Topps didn't hit a home run with this set, as it was bookended by the pennant-raising design of 1965 and 1967, a set featuring the largest photo space on a card since 1957 Topps and 1953 Bowman.

I have the sets ranked on the strength of their checklist, the strength of design, the rookie crop, the subsets (generally falling under 'checklist'), and the historical importance of the set or an element essential to the hobby that the set was first to introduce (like the all-star card subset of 1958 Topps or the 4-headed rookie of 1963 Topps).

I've also been spending the last few days trying to poke holes in my top 10, and the only thing I can come with is that the years represented are not diverse enough. For all my thoughts on fair and balanced ranking, could it be that the best sets really were the ones that came first? I don't know. But I do know one thing: the best set was not Topps' 1974 Traded set. Cross that one off the list right now... Jeez, even with Juan Marichal and Ron 'This Old Cub' Santo, it's just depressing. Thankfully, it's only 40 cards.

Right. On to the countdown.

47. 1974 Topps Traded
I'm not trying to say that this is the worst set--in the grand scheme of cards this set (series? subset of regular set? its own set?) is rather important. But 'grand scheme' symbolic strength and actual, measurable set strength are two very different things. This set is ugly. And ugliness matters. So does checklist strength. Despite a checklist of 40 cards (relatively big for a late-season subset), there are only seven big names: Marichal, Santo, Felipe Alou, Lou Piniella, Mike Marshall, Reggie Cleveland and Willie Davis. Then there's Nelson Briles, Tommie Agee, Steve Stone and Lindy McDaniel (of 'Lindy Shows Larry' fame). After that you're scraping the commons barrel (actually, you're scraping the commons barrel nowadays from Mike Marshall on, but for the sake of argument, let's forget that all but two or three of these cards can be had for less than a dime). Anyway, that line-up may have looked impressive as a launching checklist for Topps in 1974, but it translates to a success rate of just 28% for the set (success rate = # of good cards / total # of cards in set). Even when we factor in the coolness factor of getting a Traded card in your pack, well, it's still not that great. I can think of only one reason why Topps expanded the neat little Traded subset from 1972 into its own series: to sell more cards at the end of the summer, a time when kids have moved on to football cards, hockey cards, sniffing glue or whatever it is little kids do at the end of summers.

And yet, despite its weak star power, mine's not such a vast conspiracy that I think Topps had a deciding vote in who'd be traded. If anything, I think this set came about because of Marichal--and because it was time for an innovation, no matter how small. In retrospect this series can almost be viewed as a pre-emptive strike to SSPC and any other competitor Topps thought it might have had, like a one-sided, baseball card version of the Cold War arms race,a big old fuck you, let's see you balance a full year of cards and a traded series, you faceless bastards! kind of thing. Who knew that it would spawn a whole generation of Traded sets? Sure, you could make the argument that 1981 Traded was really the first, modern Traded set in the most traditional sense: 132 card sets that could only be purchased in those little color-coded boxes, but 1974 was the first time that Topps found a way to make commons desirable and to sell cards probably all the way through to November.

By the way, if you haven't noticed, my images have been getting worse lately (my computer died and took my scanner with it). That's why today's post features a nice scan of Randy Hundley from Blake Meyer's TwinsCards.com , and that great 'Card That Never Was' of Satchel Paige is from Dan Austin's Virtual Card Collection, which can be found here.


More Set Countdown Coming Soon After Christmas

Card Critic: Topps Heritage ’58

How many more years can Topps do the Heritage line? You have to think they’ll do it as long as it makes them money, right? Or is it more of a question of design? I’d like to think it’s the latter, that at a certain point they’d stop (after the well of classic design runs dry). So how many more years? Well, they’re set for now, because this set is almost flawless, a huge improvement from last year’s Heritage ’57 (and I’ve always been a much bigger fan of the 1957 design than 1958). Topps had stellar design years in 1959, 1960 (to a certain degree), 1963, 1965, 1967, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1977, 1978…but Upper Deck compromised more than a few of those years with their own rip-off Vintage line, and do we really need or want Heritage ’78?

This set—one of the strongest Heritage sets in years—represents Topps at the top of their design arc of the 1950s-1960s. Gone are the unneeded (and historically inaccurate) action poses. Instead: lots of close-ups and medium close-ups. Now I know beyond a doubt that not only does Jeff Weaver look exactly like Zach from Gilmore Girls, but he will probably fight you if you tell him. Gone is the washed-out photography that seriously marred last year’s Heritage ’57 set. Taking their places are strong colors: from the better-quality photography to the iconic solid color background; even the backs feel stronger than last year’s. The deep red may be a little hard to read in low light, but for some reason when I read them I get the strongest urge to learn how to chew tobacco. This is also odd, because I’ve always considered 1958’s design to be the most elemental Topps ever produced, almost to the flash-card degree. Like all great art, it’s all things to all people: elegant, abstract, simple, international, clean, crisp, modern, and yet I find it very pre-school (I think it would be fascinating to track down some of the old Topps designers and have them explain how they went from the almost no-design design of 1958 to the ultra modern, beatnik, jazz-record-and-advertising design of 1959. The two years couldn’t be more different. I almost expect the explanation to be that there was a change in art department leadership). Because today’s Topps designers didn’t muck around with the base card design (or any aspect thereof), it works.


As I said before, I’ve always been a bigger fan of the years around 1958 than 1958 itself. Maybe that’s because I’ve always found the design so basic, maybe because my first 1958 cards were rain-soaked commons purchased in an album at an antique store for $10 (I was really more concerned with the non-rain-soaked 1965 Frank Robinson in the same album), so I never appreciated them much. Only in the past year have I really started to discover the beauty of this set. Starting with the stellar All-Star subset (Topps has never done better), re-created beautifully in Heritage ’58—even on the obligatory non-superstar American League second baseman card of Sweet Loretta. The only thing missing was Topps getting the rights from the now-defunct Sport Magazine to use their name on the card, like in the original, because I think everybody remembers the sham that was Topps Magazine.

The card that really made me appreciate the 1958 set was the black-backgrounded Pete Whisenant (one of only six black backgrounds). He’s just a common from the Reds, but that black background kicks ass. Anyway, when I caved and bought a box of this year’s set, I got this card of Aaron Rowand in one of my first packs. All I could think of was, Yeah! Black background! Other nice little things:

• White borders on the special cards I haven’t seen that thick a border since Eddie Murray’s 1988 Record Breaker.
• Then & Now insert set This is one insert set where Topps rarely fails. They have nice pairings, decent design, and it almost feels like it could be a subset rather than an insert set.
• Tasteful airbrushing I can’t believe I just used that phrase, but it’s true. I’m not entirely sure if J.D. Drew really ever made it on to the Red Sox, but his card is pretty good. That’s not to say that all the airbrushing is great; that would be too good to be true. Ronnie Belliard’s hat is made out of frosting, and I’m not sure if those braids are his, either.

Of course, Topps makes a few blunders with this set (this wouldn’t be a Topps set without a few glaring bad decisions), but lucky for them most of those bad decisions are limited to the insert sets. Starting with the Flashbacks set.
They should really do a design overhaul on this one, and while they’re at it, they should re-evaluate where they’re getting their images. This one of Kaline is obviously taken off his 1967 card. Not even the right decade! How dumb do they think we are?

Also, when are they going to put the Chrome and Refractor insert parallel sets to bed? These sets feel over-the-hill to me. Am I the only one who’s not thrilled to get one of these in his pack? I feel like I’m just getting one less card. I’m also less than thrilled with the Home Run cards of Mantle and Rodriguez. At least in the Mantle set’s defense, it commemorates his 1958 home run title and it’s printed on the same stock as the set, so it sort of fits. But the Rodriguez cards have nothing to do with anything, plus they are printed on thin glossy stock. They feel out of place in Heritage packs, like Topps got the target audience wrong. They’re as bad and feel as worthless as the Hobby Masters from last year’s Series 2 hobby packs.

Rounding out the insert sets (that you have a decent shot in finding in a box) is the New Age Performers set. In years past, this insert set has boasted consistently good design. Unfortunately, that streak ends with this set. The starburst, the weak color palette, the squeezed serif type across the top—it all makes for a bad front. The backs are nice, but no one is going to put these in nine-pocket pages with backs facing out. Too bad.

It’s been a long, cold winter in New York, and I’m a pretty pessimistic guy, but we just got an extra hour of sunlight today, Spring is right around the corner, and for the all crap that Topps has unloaded on us in the past week or so, this year’s Heritage set is pretty great. Truthfully, I’m in the mood for collecting a set, but there’s only one thing holding me back from going for the master set (I’m 11 cards shy of the master Heritage ’54 set), and it’s this: in 1958, card #273 featured Hal Smith of the Cardinals. Smith, possibly to stem the tide of questions about who was who between the two Hal Smith’s, possibly because he was just having fun or was out of his mind, had his photo taken with his mask on. It’s one of the greatest cards ever. He’s even giving a sign, which to a little boy might look like he’s gesturing inappropriately. I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure he’s smiling, and it sure as hell is creepy. That’s why I’m crossing my fingers that there’s a card of Joe Mauer or Jason Varitek with their mask and pads on, hopefully giving an equally inappropriate-looking sign. Then I’ll know it’s okay to dive in head-first.

The Baseball Card Blog’s Holiday Gift Guide

If you’re like me, you don’t know what the hell anybody wants for the holidays. I always try to get people stuff they might like, even though it’s all stuff that I wish I could get. That’s why this year I’ve decided to give more than one person on my list a baseball or baseball card-related item, because I enjoy shopping for that kind of thing, I know how to spot a good deal, and that’s what I would want to receive as a gift. Plus, baseball and baseball card-related gifts are great for friends and relatives of any generation, and they work as both a straight and ironic gift.

I think more people should give baseball cards as gifts. They’re small, they don’t cost very much in the grand scheme of things (unless you’re giving someone a Ed Walsh T-206 or something), and for those who may not appreciate them on a sport or obsessive collector level—or even on a nostalgic childhood level—can appreciate them for what they are: little pieces of modern art.

Here are 10 ideas for your holiday shopping for collectors or not. I’ve used $20 as the max spending limit per item. (with links where appropriate)

Jose Canseco’s 1986 Donruss Rated Rookie One of our readers has dubbed this ‘The Mona Lisa of 1980s Baseball Cards’ and they couldn’t be more spot on. Let’s see…if you shell out around $8 for the card (if even that), you still have $12 to spring for a tiny gold picture frame. Then lop off the stand on the back of the frame, put a hook in the wall, hang it up in your living room and aim a track light at it, set up a velvet rope two feet in front of it and put a piece of Tupperware over it. Nice. Just like the Louvre, only better.

Old Unopened Wax Packs & Boxes An old wax box from the 1980s is a great gift. Not only should it not cost you very much over the $20 spending limit, but it’ll give you a pretty good snapshot of baseball in that time period: the mullets, the mustaches, the bad skin, the bad teams, the bad uniforms, the bad names. A good time will be had by all—just don’t eat the gum. In fact, handle the gum with rubber gloves if possible.

A Stack of Worthless Mid-Nineties Fleer Inserts (Any Sport) It’s incredible, but it seems like Fleer had a corner on the foil-stamping business back in the mid-Nineties, didn’t it? There was a point there where they inserted one insert a pack, and sometimes there were whole packs of nothing but inserts (hot packs). It’s a wonder they bothered putting out a base set at all. Anyway, now you can find just about any hobby shop with heaps of this garbage, ready to sell it way under book value (hopefully). The cards are fun, but they’re worthless. They make nice bookmarks.

A Box of 200 Semi-Rigid Card Holders I’m pretty sure you’ll strike out with this gift if you’re not giving it to a collector. But if you know a collector, they’ll thank you for it. If there’s such a thing as the semi-rigid card holder bandwagon, well, I jumped on it a few months ago and I’m trying to get as many new converts from top loaders as possible. I can’t say enough good things about these little sheets of semi-rigid clear plastic. They’ve made it possible to house valuable cards in a shoebox without worrying about jostling and bent corners in the night. If you have no idea what a semi-rigid card holder is, visit this online retailer. Many places sell them, including probably your local hobby shop.

Little Sets There was a time when I looked down on glossy cards as cheap and not to be trusted. Then the major companies started giving their cards a thin sheen and I slowly forgot about my problems with gloss. But then the other day I found a big box of cards and after going through a few stacks I came across an old Kay-Bee Toys ‘Superstars of Baseball’ card and a wave of memory hit me: the thick front gloss to mask cheap, papery white cardboard backing. But then, after momentarily contemplating throwing it away, I pulled it aside and got as many of them together as I could.

Kay Bee Toys, Rite Aid, the various Fleer offshoots, Toys R Us—I had all these little sets. I even had most of the Topps Kmart set (you know, the one that looks like a Turn Back the Clock card on every card). You’d buy these sets complete in deck form, in their own box with a checklist on the back. Some would be cheaper than others, but none of them cost very much. I think you could find most of them today on eBay or in hobby shops for under $10.

High Series Commons This would work as a gift for collectors only. And really for those collectors trying to complete a vintage Topps set. Giving someone a common may not sound like a great present, but a high series common—especially to a set builder—is another matter entirely. If the collector isn’t looking to fill the set with near mint specimen, you can find a lot of lower grade cards under the $20 price limit. And if you know of a card show or convention coming to your town, that’s a perfect place to look.

A Trip To See The Best Kept Well-Known Secret in New York City Of course I’m talking about the Honus Wagner T-206 on permanent display at New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art. While the Museum’s suggested donation entry fee is high, it is ‘suggested’, so you can pay whatever you want. I went a few weeks ago and spent about ten minutes just standing in front of the Wagner. It’s part of the incomparable Jefferson Burdick Collection, the collection of cards that all others must be judged against. Whenever I see Alan Rosen’s full-page ads in Beckett and Krause Publications, I can’t help but think that he’s suffering from some sort of Burdick-envy. Anyway, the Wagner is right there on display, sort of tucked away on the mezzanine of the American Wing. So if you happen to be in New York for the holidays, or you live here, like me, you should visit.

The 2007 SCD Standard Catalog Because of my own dumb rules for this list, this great book can’t be here. I think it costs somewhere around $40. Oh well. If you have kids, buy for them to share. If you want to teach yourself about the history of baseball cards, or admire the sheer breadth of what’s available to collect, I recommend purchasing the SCD Standard Catalog. I had an old copy from 1990 that I tore through in my youth, and I just purchased the 2006, so I don’t think I’ll be buying the 2007 anytime soon. But you should, especially if you know someone who has a penchant for reading the dictionary, an encyclopedia or the phone book. Available from Krause Publications.

Minor League Team Sets If you live in a town with a minor league baseball team, buy team sets for anyone and everyone you know. Minor league team sets are awesome. They aren’t very expensive, they’re usually sponsored by a regional product or business that nobody outside of your town or state has heard of, and the players on the team usually provide more entertaining characters than any major league team. I mean, if you live in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, and you’re a friend of mine, I would want you to give me a Pawtucket Red Sox team set with a card of Izzy Alcantara (you know, the wacko who karate-kicked the opposing catcher in the chest).

With minor league team sets there’s the possibility of up-and-comers, down-on-their-heels old timers, minor league lifers and a card of the mascot. Jeez, I could go on forever, and I haven’t even got to the very good possibility of the washed-up ex-major leaguer who’s now the manager.

Individual Star Cards If you’re a friend of mine, you’ll probably get a star card this year as a present (hello, Vince Coleman rookie card). Some cards are perennial favorites, like any of the all-star cards from 1958, 1960 and 1961, or older team rookies from the Sixties. If you’re looking for just one card (and you’re relatively new to baseball cards), you may want to stick to the big names. But if you don’t have big-name cash and want to dig a little deeper into the hobby, here are a few years when Topps produced great-looking star cards: 1959, 1965, 1967, 1971, 1975-78, 1981, 1985.

And if you really want to cheat, Topps Archives is a way to get the big names for under $20. You won’t be buying the real thing, but Archives has been a great addition to the hobby, and an especially good way to get younger collectors into older sets.

9 Cards to Jumpstart Your Collection

I got an email the other day from a collector who wanted to see if there were cards he should own over others. It got me thinking: if you wanted to get back into card collecting but didn’t know where to start, how would you? Would you flail around for a few months buying new packs? And how quickly would you become disillusioned by the whole jerseys/autographs/parallels/sequentially-numbered phase in which the hobby is so firmly entrenched? And what if you had a budget? So much to consider.

So I’ve put together nine cards I think would be great additions to any collection. One thing to keep in mind: I’m not going to talk about obvious, pillars-of-collections cards like the Schmidt or Brett rookies, or any early Ryans. Instead, here are nine cards I think would be a good place to start, to pick up from or to round out a collection.

For me, there is no question about where to begin: star rookies from the 1970s. If you’re more concerned with owning the card rather than the condition of the card, it’s relatively easy to find reasonably priced cards from this decade. The 1972 Topps Carlton Fisk/Cecil Cooper/Mike Andrews rookie is a great card you can find relatively cheap. I don’t know why this is, seeing as how two of the guys were All-Stars and Fisk is one of the greatest catchers ever. By relatively cheap I mean you can probably find a 60/40 fair to excellent conditioned copy in the neighborhood of $17 to $35. I just saw one last month at the Round Lake, NY, Antique Festival in this shape for $15, but that’s probably on the low side, price-wise…

…Another great star rookie from the Seventies is the 1977 Topps Andre Dawson. Hawk is one of those guys who early on didn’t get enough love from card companies. Was it because he was a star in Montreal? But Gary Carter and Tim Raines got plenty o’love. Of all the dumb reasons it was probably because he was just a consistently great player…

…To switch gears for a minute away from rookies, if you want to get in on something really great that Topps did in the Sixties, add a League Leaders card to your collection. It’s an inexpensive way to get cards with multiple Hall of Fame players, and if you’re on a very tight budget, leaders cards with one or no big name, Hall of Fame players can fall under a dollar. Some years did leaders cards better than others. 1961 (the first year of the subset) is great, as are 1962, 1963, 1965, 1967 and 1968. Perhaps the best year was 1963, as each card featured five or six stars to the other years’ two, three or (in rare instances) four. The 1963 Topps American League Home Run Leaders card features Cash, Colavito, Killebrew, Maris, Jim Gentile and Leon Wagner. I think I got this card, which is by no means in perfect condition, for one or two dollars. Leaders cards are a great way to get cards of Hall of Famers if you can’t afford their regular cards…

…Speaking of cards nobody can afford, take a look at 1949 Leaf. I was at the Allentown, Pennsylvania Ephemera Show yesterday. There was a dealer there who let me thumb through his collection of this set, and let me tell you, it’s one of the most perfect ever made. If you’re into printmaking and aesthetically-pleasing artwork, this set is for you. The photos are cheap, black and white; the printing looks like it was done for fun by a high school student in their garage, and the card stock is a bit mealy. Also, it’s (appropriately) nearly impossible to put together a complete set—cards are hard to find, especially in decent condition, and when you do find them, you can’t afford them (the Satchel Paige card is worth $12,000 by itself in near-mint condition (good luck with that)). But just because you may have to forgo eating or paying rent shouldn’t deter you from getting one of these cards. The guy at the show yesterday wanted $50 for the Andy Pafko (in fair condition) and $35 for the common I had pulled out. I didn’t get either (I was hoping they’d be in such bad condition that their price would dip below $10. No luck.) But if you’re considering spending $35 to $50 on a box of relatively worthless crap made in 2006, why not spend it on a piece of baseball history? Besides, how many of your card-collecting friends have a card from the Forties? And if you decide to really go all-out (and by ‘all-out’ I mean spend over $100 on a single card), take a long look at the Ralph Kiner rookie. It’s a helluva card, and one of the cheaper Hall of Fame rookies…

…As long as we’re talking about baseball history, I think your collection needs any card of Jackie Jensen that you can find. Here was a guy—one of the best home run hitters of the Fifties, no less—who was left undeservedly in the dust by western expansion, all because he was deathly afraid of flying. I’ve probably pontificated long and hard about the baseball card’s role to the student of the game, so I won’t bore you here, but Jensen’s is a career that deserves more attention. Take a look at his offensive stats; they’re staggering. Imagine: the guy is the AL’s MVP in 1958 and two years later he’s out of the league. If he were playing today team trainers would find a way to get him on the plane (though he’d probably end up addicted to Xanax). And if that didn’t work, he could buy one of John Madden’s old buses and revive big league barnstorming as he partied his way around the country…

…You know, when I was writing about the 1985 Topps set, I totally forgot about Eric Davis and how his rookie card was worth nearly $30 for years. Wow, what a slip-up. If you’re looking for a card to add, this has to be on the list. You can probably get it for under $4 today. That reminds me, I should do a list of all the guys from the Eighties that you totally wanted their card and now they’re not worth shit. That would be some kind of list, I bet. Canseco would be on there, Strawberry, Gooden, Will Clark’s ’87 Fleer card, the Gregg Jeffries Topps card from 1989, Kevin Seitzer from 1987 Fleer…and definitely Eric Davis. Was there a bigger guy in 1985 than Eric Davis? Maybe Dwight Gooden had him beat, but shit, man, Eric Davis! You have to get a card of him. You know your collection has been begging you for literally years for a card of this guy…

…I did a list of Top Traded Cards of Veterans a while back, and the 1984 Fleer Update card of Pete Rose came in #6, but the 1984 Topps Traded Pete Rose failed to crack the top 10. I think I made that decision based on the obvious fact that the Fleer set was so much scarcer than the Topps set and was one of the most iconic of the decade. But in terms of the idea of adding a single card to help jumpstart you collecting again, I’m going to have to say go for the Topps over the Fleer, simply because you get two photos of Rose in his awkward Expos garb rather just the one on the Fleer Update card. You can never have enough photos of Pete Rose in that awkward-sitting Expos batting helmet. Plus, it’s one of the few cards of him not in either a Phillies or Reds uniform. Similarly, if you hate Pete Rose but somehow like Reggie Jackson, try to get a card of him on the Orioles (it’s harder than you might think)…

...Without sounding too much like I’m trying to sell you something, no collection is complete if it doesn’t have a 1981 Topps Fernando Valenzuela rookie. And while we’re talking about cards of the Mexican fireballer, you should also try to find a card of him when he was seriously overweight and on the Phillies. I’m thinking 1994-95, when he had those ridiculously nerdy oversized wire-rimmed glasses. If you’re lucky, there’s probably an Upper Deck card of him out there from that time period showing him batting. By the way, what was with UD and their obsession with showing pitchers at the plate? I remember they had a card of Jim Abbott trying to lay down a bunt. Who greenlit that card?…

…Finally, no list of fresh-direction baseball cards would be complete without mentioning the Seattle Pilots. So that’s why you should add any card of a Seattle Pilot you can find. It’s not that hard; Topps only included them in the 1970 set. If you’ve never heard of the Pilots, they were truly a horrible team, despite having the league leader in steals. Plus, they played in a place called Sicks Stadium. Yikes. In just one season (1969) they managed to play out their welcome in Seattle and were sold to a group that turned the team into the Milwaukee Brewers. Your collection definitely needs a Seattle Pilot…

So here are 9 cards to consider adding to your collection (if you haven’t already). If you’re trying to get back in or don’t know where to start, perhaps one these cards will be your first step.

Countdown #42: 1974 Topps

First, a little background to give this set a sense of history in terms of design, checklist and overall make up. This set was the last to do a dual-league all-star by position subset (until the mid-Nineties), the last to feature the landscape orientation on regular base cards (until 1991 or 1992, I can never remember which) and it was the set that showed Topps how to properly perform hero worship on a still-active player (Hank Aaron), so successful in fact, that it emulated it to near-perfection twelve years later with Pete Rose in 1986.

1974 is a classic example of ‘the strongly designed set’, or a set where the main graphical element is present on every card. In ’74’s case, it’s the streamlined pennant (stolen and reconfigured from the classic design of 1965) on nearly every card. Those goddamn pennants…they’re ugly as hell, and you sure do get sick of them after about 20 cards, but you have to hand it to those Topps designers, because six years later in 1980 they take the same tired pennants, skew them 45 degrees and somehow make everything seem pleasing and fresh.

The ’74 backs were hard to read, set in a dark green, and, despite their misgivings, managed to establish their own place in history: they laid the groundwork for 1982’s not-quite-as-hard-but-still-hard-to-read dark green backs.

Finally, the checklist: You got a second-year Schmidt in there, plus early career Fisk, Munson, Reggie, and all the other great early Seventies stars from the A’s, Reds and everywhere in between, plus a few nice subsets. As I mentioned before, the dual-league All-Star cards are cool, and that subset wasn’t done again—by Topps or anyone else—until Topps brought it back in 1993.

Aaron was rightly worshipped with his own subset, and really this is his set (and it’s too bad, too, that Hank couldn’t have accomplished his homer heroics in the Summer of ’74, so that Topps could’ve put out a commemorative card in the late-series Traded series and then put out a special hero-worship subset in the 1975 set. That would’ve catapulted 1975 into the top ten sets ever made. Can you imagine? Cards 653-659 could’ve been ‘Hank Aaron Years’ cards, with card #660—his penultimate regular card, with maybe a photo of him at his car lot down in Atlanta, or smoking a cigar at home plate, or pushing away shaggy Braves fans as he rounded third, or, wait for it, a photo of him as a young call up for the Boston Braves in ’53? How about that?), which is just too bad, because there are a number of signs that this set is the quintessential one-step-away-from-greatness set, the ‘Biding Our Time’ set, the ‘Wait Til Next Year’ set…really, besides the Hank Aaron cards and the Winfield rookie, this set is a load of garbage.

Let me back that wild claim up with some rockhard facts. Not too many subsets, and these Seventies sets almost live or die on their subset inventiveness. 1972 had a late-series ‘Traded’ subset, 1975 had the MVPs through the years, 1977 had ‘Big League Brothers’ featuring the shell-shocked Reuschels. 1976 had the All-Time Team. 1972 had ‘In Action’ and a few ‘Boyhood Photos of the Stars’. 1973 had some more Boyhood Photos, including one of Catfish Hunter clutching a farm animal. What did 1974 have besides the Aaron Hero-Worship to open the set? World Series cards, dual-league leaders, All-Stars and a team variation. I guess you have to also count the Traded series as a subset for this set, but since I’ve already counted it separately, let’s forget it. Also, forget the team variation as a legitimate subset. So that leaves us with three subsets that were by this time pretty tired. OK, next.

Landscaped base cards. You may think that that would be a good thing, and in theory I’d agree with you—1960 is one my favorite designs. But the photography is especially bad in this set, and it’s a doubly bad sin, since most of the cards are action shots...out of control, out of focus action shots. Topps did a courageous thing three years earlier with the 1971 set: they moved out of the dugout and off the sidelines and incorporated action shots onto base cards. Then, in 1972 they introduced ‘In Action’ and corralled the action shot into a more manageable subset. 1973 was dominated by headshots and posed action sideline shots with actual action shots tossed in to make a strong mix. The photo quality suggested a special color front-page newspaper photo, or a spread in Sport. Then between 1973 and 1974 it’s like the Topps photo and art departments had a collective nervous breakdown, hit the bottle and just gave up. Really, if it had been me, I would’ve quit after producing the masterful Yellow Submarine, Electric Company 1972 set and not even had to stoop to producing the whitebread IBM punchcard 1973 design. If it were up to me, I would’ve commissioned Andy Warhol to do his take on the 1949 Leaf design, and then after shelling out three-quarters of the year’s budget, he’d probably just show me the same design, I’d call it Brilliant!, and we’d go from there. I’d start hanging out at The Factory, get kicked out for being a grown man and always talking about baseball cards while not being high, then start my own hip inner circle drop-in-hang-out-print-fume-inhalation-room place on the other side of Union Square and call in The Sweatshop. It would be totally
awesome and big shots like Elliott Gould, Tom Seaver and Karen Black would come by, like, all the time, and the difference between my place and The Factory would be that instead of sitting around and trying to act all cool in front of each other, we’d sit around and make shit. Hell, we’d sit at long tables and make shit for hours, well, the celebrities would sit, and make stuff, like pot holders and fake designer handbags and leather boots, and I’d sit in my air conditioned office and talk with suppliers on the phone and then come out periodically to make sure that everybody was having a good time. And if they weren’t—and I’m talking big shots here, like Bud Harrelson and Clyde Frazier, Harvey Keitel and Henry Kissinger—well, then I’d launch into a long-winded speech on why Gus Triandos was completely undeserving of a 2nd Tier number in the meritocracy of the Topps checklisting universe of the 1960s…and they'd snap right back to work, because I happen to feel strongly about that and can go on about it for a long time (and really nobody wants that)...

Anyway, the photography (action, sideline, all and every kind) wasn’t very good in the 1974 set and I think there was something wrong with the color.

Finally, 1974’s rookie class is one of the weakest of the decade, if not the weakest. It hurt the make up of the set that Topps didn’t do team rookie cards in ’74. Instead there are a handful of by-position major-league rookies at the end of the set and base cards for the rest of the set. If some of them happened to be rookies (like Dave Winfield and Dave Parker), well, that’s cool, but still. I would rate the rookie class of the 1974 just below that of 1976, and even 1976 was pretty weak.

Here’s how the rookies of 1974 stack up against those from the rest of the decade.

Worthwhile 1974 Rookies
Dave Winfield
Dave Parker
Bill Madlock
Frank Tanana
Ken Griffey
Frank White
Manny Trillo
Brian Downing
Bake McBride
Bucky Dent
Gorman Thomas
Gene Garber
Steve Rogers
Randy Jones
Bill Campbell


Granted, fifteen’s not a bad number. Hell, there are more rookies than that in the set, but you know, no offense, but you have to draw the line at Elias Sosa and Dick Ruthven. Anyway, if you really wanted to be strict about calling rookies ‘worthwhile’, you’d probably have to trim that list at least in half. Now let’s look at it again:

Worthwhile 1974 Rookies
Dave Winfield (HOF)
Dave Parker
Bill Madlock
Frank Tanana
Ken Griffey
Frank White
Manny Trillo

Not so great anymore, huh? Just one HOFer, and I don’t know if Parker will ever get there even after a thousand years on the Veterans Committee ballot, assuming he’s on there. Anyway, the point is, this is one heck of a weak rookie class…though you know, the more I think about the Seventies, the more I’m realizing that those years were really hit or miss in terms of rookie classes. I bet that if we go set by set from 1970 to 1979 about half would have a Worthwhile Rookie Checklist about as long as 1974 and the other half maybe a little longer. I’m going to guess that 1972, 1975 and 1978 will have the longest lists, 1973 and 1979 will have the shortest, and 1974 and 1976 will still be tied for the weakest.

Worthwhile 1970 Rookies
Bill Buckner
Bill Lee
Vida Blue
Gene Tenace
Jerry Reuss
Thurman Munson
Darrell Evans
Reggie Cleveland

Worthwhile 1971 Rookies
George Foster
Dave Concepcion
Bert Blyleven
Ken Singleton
Ted Simmons
Dusty Baker
Don Baylor
Steve Garvey

Worthwhile 1972 Rookies
Carlton Fisk (HOF)
Cecil Cooper
Darrell Porter
J.R. Richard
Chris Chambliss
Richie Zisk
Steve Stone
Rick Dempsey
Ron Cey
Ben Ogilvie

Worthwhile 1973 Rookies
Mike Schmidt (HOF)
Dwight Evans
Rich Gossage
Buddy Bell
Jorge Orta (Mexican HOF)
Dave Lopes
Bob Boone

Worthwhile 1974 Rookies
See above


Worthwhile 1975 Rookies
George Brett (HOF)
Robin Yount (HOF)
Jim Rice
Fred Lynn
Gary Carter (HOF)
Keith Hernandez
Rick Burleson

Worthwhile 1976 Rookies
Dennis Eckersley (HOF)
Mike Flanagan
Ron Guidry
Willie Randolph
Chet Lemon
Jerry Remy

Worthwhile 1977 Rookies
Bruce Sutter (HOF)
Dale Murphy
Andre Dawson
Garry Templeton
Mark Fidrych
Tony Armas
Dennis Martinez
Jack Clark
Len Barker

Worthwhile 1978 Rookies
Eddie Murray (HOF)
Paul Molitor (HOF)
Alan Trammell
Jack Morris
Lou Whitaker
Lance Parrish
Willie Hernandez
Warren Cromartie (big in Japan)

Worthwhile 1979 Rookies
Ozzie Smith (HOF)
Pedro Guerrero
Lonnie Smith
Dwayne Murphy
Bob Welch
Willie Wilson
Bob Horner (wanted to be big in Japan)

Well, I was wrong. I would have to say that 1975 and dark horse 1971 are tied for strongest rookie class, though 1977 is by far my favorite. Any set boasting rookies of Barker, Templeton and The Bird—all three of which I can probably purchase for under a dollar combined—is a friend of mine. But anyway, you see what I mean about the Seventies: these sets don’t have more than one or two worthwhile rookies each, which is a shame. Especially in the case of 1974, since there aren’t many other reasons to collect it.

Early Thoughts on 2014 Topps Heritage

Surprise, surprise—I've been thinking about next year's Topps Heritage set. This morning I had some time and put together a "probables" list for the Real One autograph set. It's fascinating to me that we as collectors will pay a premium for autographed reprints, rather than paying 30% to 50% of the cost for an autographed original. Is it really all about the Topps seal of approval?

That said, here is a first-draft list of who I think will be included on the Real One autograph checklist for 2014 Topps Heritage. Odds of their inclusion are in parentheses.

Stars
Joe Morgan (2-1) - Hall of Fame second baseman's rookie seems like a no-brainer
Jim Bunning (3-1) - Hall of Famer and former U.S. Senator with time on his hands
Al McBean (10-1) - All-star in 1964
Jim Bouton (10-1) - Is Bouton still a baseball pariah?
Mike Shannon (5-1) - Popular St. Louis Cardinals personality
Juan Marichal (3-1) - Hall of Famer
Jim Kaat (5-1) - Member of the "Hall of Very Good"
Willie Mays (2-1) - If he's still under contract with Topps, I see Mays being a cornerstone in this set, as he earned the MVP award in 1965
Sandy Koufax (5-1) - What would it take to get Sandy Koufax in this set?
Frank Robinson (10-1) - I'm on the fence about this one. He's participated in a few of Heritage sets in the past.
Yogi Berra (3-1): 1965 was his last card as an active player. Seems like a no-brainer to include him here.
Bob Gibson (5-1): Heritage regular in the last few years.
Whitey Ford (5-1): Mainstay of Heritage autograph lineups.
Al Kaline (2-1): Heritage mainstay. More of a shock if he's not included.
Common players (1-2) - Topps autograph insert sets for Heritage are usually chock'o'block with common players. Heritage '65 should be no exception.

I recognize that Topps does an autograph insert set in Heritage as a way to celebrate and remember the individual players included in the original set for that year. Stockpiling stars is not really the point. So with that in mind, here are the 1950s and 1960s original stars and notables included in Heritage autographs checklists, starting in 2001.

The 2001 and 2002 checklists featured a mix of original and current players, with all original players being stars. There was a shift for the 2003 checklist, where only three current stars were included (Lance Berkman, Jose Cruz Jr., and Jimmy Rollins). The rest of the checklist was filled in with common players from the original set. From 2004 on, Topps used a balanced checklist of original and current players.

'52 Heritage (2001): Pafko, Thomson, Snider, Groat, Dom DiMaggio, Slaughter, McDougald, Bauer, Sauer, Wilhelm, Garagiola, Sain, Irvin, Minoso, Rizzuto, Roberts, Schoendienst, Mays, Spahn, Law, Roe, Vernon, Joe Mays, Simmons, Shantz — 25 out of 50

'53 Heritage (2002): Rosen, Schoendienst, Feller, Shantz, Dom DiMaggio, Slaughter, Kell, McDougald, Wilhelm, Podres, Irvin, Minoso, Rizzuto, Ford, Mays, Spahn, Berra, Roe, Carey, Dark, Black, Boone, Face — 23 out of 28

'54 Heritage (2003): Kaline, Pafko, Skowron, Shantz, Groat, Snider, Banks, Aaron, Bauer, Podres, Irvin, Rizzuto, Roe, Face, Lasorda, Law, Ford, Mays, Berra — 19 out of 45

'55 Heritage (2004): Kaline, Newcombe, Snider, Banks, Killebrew, Podres, Musial, Mays, Berra — 9 out of 34

'56 Heritage (2005): Feller, Snider, Banks, Aaron, Irvin, Berra — 6 out of 23

'57 Heritage (2006): Rhodes, Snider, Banks, F. Robinson, Parnell, Musial, Ford, Berra — 8 out of 29

'58 Heritage (2007): Kaline, B. Robinson, Zimmer, Snider, Kell, Bunning, Podres, Aparicio, Schoendienst — 9 out of 36

'59 Heritage (2008): Kaline, Skowron, Erskine, Rhodes, Snider, F. Robinson, Brosnan, Zernial, Aparicio, Kaat*, Minoso, Cepeda, Wills*, Mazeroski, Berra, Tommy Davis* — 16 out of 57

'60 Heritage (2009): McDougald, Dark — 2 out of 48

'61 Heritage (2010): Rosen, Gibson, F. Robinson, Aparicio, Schoendienst — 5 out of 36

'62 Heritage (2011): Kaline, Gibson, B. Robinson, Banks, Yost, F. Thomas, Aaron, Koufax, Musial, Pierce — 10 out of 37

'63 Heritage (2012): Gibson, Turley, Virdon, Maxwell, Brosnan, Cunningham, Logan, Marichal, Aparicio, Minoso, Cepeda, Schoendienst, Musial, Mays, McCormick, McCovey, F. Torre — 18 out of 49

'64 Heritage (2013): Mays, Musial, Cepeda, Wills*, Minoso, Tiant, Marichal, Gibson, Pierce, Richardson, Shantz, Maxwell, Groat, Banks, F. Robinson, Aaron — 16 out of 63

*Not included in the original set.

These figures only included the Real One autograph insert sets, not dual or triple or any other insert set of autographed cards included in a Heritage product. Even still, note how the number of autograph subjects fluctuates from year to year. 2009's '60 Heritage set is clearly the loser in terms of original stars: just two out of a checklist of 48 subjects (and some collectors may not even consider Alvin Dark or Gil McDougald stars). This year's set includes the most subjects at 63, and 2002's '53 Heritage checklist provided the highest likelihood of pulling an autographed card of a Hall of Famer: 11 of its 28 autograph subjects are members.

What will next year's '65 Heritage give us? Probably as large an auto checklist as '64 Heritage (at least 60 subjects, comprised of current and original players). And probably as many Heritage regulars, stars, and Hall of Fame players, with one or two surprises. Steve Carlton? Duke Snider in a Giants uni? Lou Brock? And what about signatures that include more than just a name? Or an exchange card for a personalized auto? Or an exchange for an autographed buy back? With so many options not yet explored, it will be interesting to see how Topps approaches autographs next year, something they're probably thinking about right now down on Whitehall Street.

The Essentials

Let's say that you were assigned the job of putting together a baseball card time capsule, to be opened way in the future, presumably a time when it's normal for baseball cards to talk (not just Topps' Talkin' Baseball, which I'm still looking for, by the way). If you were to put together a list of those cards that are most essential to the hobby, that best represent achievements in the baseball card (after WWII), which cards would you choose?

I've put together a list (it's relatively short) of 59 non-rookie cards (from 1948 to 1989), 97 rookies (1948 to present), and 24 sets (1948 to 1989). I've asked Chris Harris of Stale Gum to provide a list from 1990 to the present. Here's what we came up with (in no particular order):

The Essentials (Post War)

Rookies
1. 1969 Topps Reggie Jackson (r)
2. 1960 Topps Carl Yastzremski (r)
3. 1978 Topps Eddie Murray (r)
4. 1980 Topps Rickey Henderson (r)
5. 1982 Topps Cal Ripken (r)
6. 1979 Topps Ozzie Smith (r)
7. 1972 Topps Carlton Fisk/Cecil Cooper (r)
8. 1975 Topps Fred Lynn (r)
9. 1978 Topps Paul Molitor/Alan Trammell (r)
10. 1952 Topps Ed Mathews (r)
11. 1954 Topps Ernie Banks (r)
12. 1954 Topps Henry Aaron (r)
13. 1954 Topps Al Kaline (r)
14. 1955 Topps Sandy Koufax (r)
15. 1955 Topps Roberto Clemente (r)
16. 1984 Fleer Update Roger Clemens (r)
17. 1984 Fleer Update Kirby Puckett (r)
18. 1975 Topps George Brett (r)
19. 1968 Topps Nolan Ryan/Jerry Koosman (r)
20. 1968 Topps Johnny Bench (r)
21. 1967 Topps Tom Seaver (r)
22. 1965 Topps Steve Carlton (r)
23. 1963 Topps Pete Rose (r)
24. 1962 Topps Lou Brock (r)
25. 1960 Topps Willie McCovey (r)
26. 1957 Topps Frank Robinson (r)
27. 1957 Topps Brooks Robinson (r)
28. 1951 Bowman Mickey Mantle (r)
29. 1951 Bowman Willie Mays (r)
30. 1948 Bowman Stan Musial (r)
31. 1949 Bowman Satchel Paige (r)
32. 1989 Upper Deck Ken Griffey, Jr. (r)
33. 1967 Topps Rod Carew (r)
34. 1983 Topps Tony Gwynn (r)
35. 1983 Topps Wade Boggs (r)
36. 1983 Topps Ryne Sandberg (r)
37. 1984 Topps Traded Dwight Gooden (r)
38. 1984 Donruss Don Mattingly (r)
39. 1985 Topps Roger Clemens (r)
40. 1985 Topps Mark McGwire (r)
41. 1987 Fleer Will Clark (r)
42. 1987 Fleer Barry Bonds (r)
43. 1987 Topps Bo Jackson (r)
44. 1986 Donruss Jose Canseco (r)
45. 1985 Topps Kirby Puckett (r)
46. 1985 Topps Dwight Gooden (r)
47. 1989 Fleer Ken Griffey, Jr. (r)
48. 1989 Fleer Bill Ripken (r)
49. 1987 Donruss Greg Maddux (r)
50. 1966 Topps Jim Palmer (r)
51. 1963 Topps Willie Stargell (r)
52. 1970 Topps Thurman Munson (r)
53. 1959 Topps Bob Gibson (r)
54. 1972 Topps JR Richard (r)
55. 1991 Upper Deck Pedro Martinez (r)
56. 1994 SP Alex Rodriguez (r)
57. 1992 Bowman Mike Piazza (r)
58. 1975 Topps Robin Yount (r)
59. 1974 Topps Dave Winfield (r)
60. 1976 Topps Dennis Eckersley (r)
61. 1973 Topps Mike Schmidt (r)
62. 2001 Topps Ichiro (r)
63. 1990 Leaf Frank Thomas (r)
64. 1991 Stadium Club Jeff Bagwell (r)
65. 1992 Bowman Manny Ramirez (r)
66. 1993 SP Derek Jeter (r)
67. 1992 Topps Traded Nomar Garciaparra (r)
68. 1995 Bowman Vladimir Guerrero (r)
69. 1991 Bowman Chipper Jones (r)
70. 1965 Topps Jim Hunter (r)
71. 1965 Topps Joe Morgan (r)
72. 1970 Topps Vida Blue (r)
73. 1975 Topps Jim Rice (r)
74. 1975 Topps Gary Carter (r)
75. 1977 Topps Dale Murphy (r)
76. 1981 Topps Fernando Valenzuela (r)
77. 1992 Bowman Mariano Rivera (r)
78. 1990 Leaf Sammy Sosa (r)
79. 1965 Topps Tony Perez (r)
80. 1949 Leaf Jackie Robinson (r)
81. 1948 Bowman Yogi Berra (r)
82. 1948 Bowman Bob Feller (r)
83. 1948 Bowman Warren Spahn (r)
84. 1948 Bowman Phil Rizzuto (r)
85. 1951 Bowman Whitey Ford (r)
86. 1949 Bowman Roy Campanella (r)
87. 1955 Topps Harmon Killebrew (r)
88. 1961 Topps Juan Marichal (r)
89. 1955 Topps Harry Agganis (r)
90. 1962 Topps Gaylord Perry (r)
91. 1964 Topps Phil Niekro (r)
92. 1988 Fleer Tom Glavine (r)
93. 1988 Fleer Edgar Martinez (r)
94. 1988 Score Update Craig Biggio (r)
95. 1988 Score Update Roberto Alomar (r)
96. 2002 Bowman David Wright (r)
97. 2001 Bowman Albert Pujols (r)

Individual Cards (1948 – 1989)
1. 1952 Topps Andy Pafko
2. 1954 Topps Ted Williams (#1)
3. 1954 Topps Ted Williams (#250)
4. 1959 Topps Symbol of Courage (Roy Campanella)
5. 1957 Topps Ted Williams
6. 1958 Topps Stan Musial All-Star
7. 1953 Topps Mickey Mantle
8. 1953 Topps Jackie Robinson
9. 1952 Topps Willie Mays
10. 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle
11. 1967 Topps Carl Yastzremski
12. 1975 Topps Joe Morgan
13. 1972 Topps Joe Morgan Traded
14. 1965 Topps Yogi Berra
15. 1951 Bowman Yogi Berra
16. 1951 Bowman Ted Williams
17. 1953 Topps Ed Mathews
18. 1988 Topps Wade Boggs
19. 1967 Topps Whitey Ford
20. 1954 Topps Warren Spahn
21. 1969 Topps Aurelio Rodriguez
22. 1971 Topps Thurman Munson
23. 1969 Topps Maury Wills
24. 1982 Topps Traded Ozzie Smith
25. 1981 Topps Traded Dave Winfield
26. 1984 Topps Traded Pete Rose
27. 1976 Topps Traded Oscar Gamble
28. 1976 Topps Bazooka Champion Kurt Bevacqua
29. 1977 Topps Big League Brothers (George & Ken Brett)
30. 1963 Topps Pride of the NL (Mays & Musial)
31. 1961 Topps Sandy Koufax
32. 1962 Topps Roger Maris
33. 1974 Topps Hank Aaron
34. 1970 Topps “Mets Whoop It Up”
35. 1972 Topps Roberto Clemente
36. 1973 Topps Roberto Clemente
37. 1978 Topps Jim Rice
38. 1985 Topps Pete Rose
39. 1987 Fleer “Dr. K Meets Super K” (Clemens & Gooden)
40. 1988 Topps “A’s Leaders” (Canseco & McGwire)
41. 1964 Topps NL Home Run Leaders (Aaron/Cepeda/Mays/McCovey)
42. 1963 Topps Brooks Robinson
43. 1963 Topps Casey Stengel
44. 1963 Topps NL Home Run Leaders (Aaron/Banks/Cepeda/Mays/F. Robinson)
45. 1962 Topps “Maris Blasts 61st”
46. 1962 Topps “The Switch Hitter Connects”
47. 1962 Topps Babe Ruth Story “Greatest Sports Hero”
48. 1962 Topps “Manager’s Dream” (Mantle & Mays)
49. 1954 Topps O’Brien Brothers
50. 1961 Topps “Brother Battery” (Larry & Norm Sherry)
51. 1961 Topps “Gehrig Benched After 2,130 Games”
52. 1958 Topps Don Mossi
53. 1957 Topps “Yankees Power Hitters” (Berra & Mantle)
54. 1955 Topps Dusty Rhodes
55. 1977 Topps Reggie Jackson
56. 1975 Topps Carlton Fisk
57. 1970 Topps Seattle Pilots Team
58. 1954 Bowman Ted Williams
59. 1964 Topps Ken Hubbs In Memoriam


Sets
1. 1952 Topps
2. 1953 Topps
3. 1954 Topps
4. 1986 Topps Traded
5. 1959 Topps
6. 1965 Topps
7. 1963 Topps
8. 1972 Topps
9. 1975 Topps / Mini
10. 1984 Donruss
11. 1957 Topps
12. 1955 Topps
13. 1975 SSPC
14. 1986 Sportflics
15. 1949 Leaf
16. Complete run of Donruss Diamond Kings (1982 – 1989)
17. 1987 Topps
18. 1989 Upper Deck
19. 1978 Topps
20. 1971 Topps
21. 1951 Bowman
22. 1955 Bowman
23. 1963 Fleer
24. 1951 Topps Blue & Red


Chris Harris' List (1990 to present)

1. 90 Upper Deck Reggie Jackson Baseball Heroes AU
2. 90 Score Bo Jackson "Black and White"
3. 90 Topps Frank Thomas NNOF
4. 91 Donruss Elite (set)
5. 91 Stadium Club (set)
6. 91 Upper Deck Michael Jordan
7. 92 Bowman (set)
8. 92 Fleer Rookie Sensations Frank Thomas
9. 92 Score The Franchise Mantle/Musial/Yastremzki AU
10. 92 Topps Gold Brien Taylor AU
11. 93 Finest Refractors (set)
12. 94 Leaf Limited Phenoms A-Rod
13. 94 Score Rookie/Traded Call-Up A-Rod
14. 94 SP Holoview FX (set)
15. 94 Upper Deck Michael Jordan
16. 94 Upper Deck Griffey/Mantle AU
17. 96 Leaf Signature (set)
18. 96 Select Certified Mirror Gold (set)
19. 96 SPx (set)
20. 97 Flair Showcase Legacy Masterpiece Ken Griffey, Jr.
21. 97 New Pinnacle Press Plates
22. 97 Upper Deck Game Jersey Ken Griffey, Jr. GU
23. 98 Upper Deck Retro Legedary Cuts Babe Ruth AU
24. 99 Upper Deck A Piece of Hostory Babe Ruth GU
25. 99 Upper Deck 10th Anniversary Buy-Back Ken Griffey, Jr. AU
26. 00 Fleer Tradition (set)
27. 00 Greats of the Game Autographs (set) AU
28. 00 Greats of the Game Yankee Clippings Mickey Mantle GU
29. 01 Donruss (set) -- If only for pure suckiness.
30. 01 SP Legendary Cuts (set) AU
31. 01 Sweet Spot Signatures Babe Ruth AU
32. 01 Topps Heritage (set)
33. 01 Ultimate Collection (set)
34. 02 Topps 206 Honus Wagner GU
35. 04 Diamond Kings (set)
36. 04 Donruss Fans of the Game James Gandolfini AU
37. 04 Leaf Certified Satchel Paige GU
38. 04 Topps American Treasures (set) AU
39. 06 Topps Allen & Ginter Danica Patrick AU
40. 07 Topps Derek Jeter
41. 07 Topps Allen & Ginter Ken Jennings
42. 07 Topps Allen & Ginter George Washington DNA

Please leave a comment on this post if you think we've left anything out.

Forget #1–Who’s #285?

Last week, as I lazily moved from one destination to the next around Northern Vermont, I got to thinking: did Topps create Mickey Mantle, or did The Mick create Topps? (In the public consciousness, I mean). And if the former is true, couldn’t it also be said that Topps either created to help to mold the popularity (and possibly career) swings of every other baseball player since 1951? These questions got me (in a roundabout way) to the idea of the Topps checklist, the meritocracy theory behind each set’s checklist, and whether or not it would be possible—based on a few studious hours with an old Beckett and Microsoft Excel—for me to create a checklist for an ‘average’ Topps set.

The more I thought about it, the easier it seemed to be. So this weekend, after I got back from my trip, I started. I decided to create a checklist for an ‘average’ 1960s Topps set: 598 cards complete with 12 multi-player League Leaders, 20 All-Stars, Team Cards, Special Cards and regular cards of most players with cards in three or more sets from the decade.

I started with the biggest names first (I naively thought this would be easiest): Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Koufax, Musial, Spahn, Clemente and Frank Robinson. Mays and Aaron were the easiest of these first eight. Mays was a consistent Hero Number (full hundred numbers, like 100, 200, etc.) for most of the decade (only in 1969 was he demoted to #190, a 2nd Tier Number (like 10, 20, 540, etc., though not numbers ending in 50, which are essentially Hero Numbers), with 4 years at a number ending in 50, with two years as 200 and two years in a row as 300. I gave him #150 (Koufax took #200).

Aaron was all over the map in the Topps Sixties, with four years as a 2nd Tier, one year as a 3rd Tier (numbers ending in 5) and the remaining five years a Hero Number. It was easy for me to put him at #300.

Clemente was also easy. It took Topps quite a while to acknowledge him worthy of a Hero Number (1966, #300), so because the purpose of this exercise is to create an ‘average’ set, Clemente was not given a Hero Number, but instead a 2nd Tier, #160.

Spahn and Koufax are interesting, because if you study the checklists from the Topps Sixties, it seems as though Koufax was Spahn’s heir to the Pitcher Hero Number—not Bob Gibson, who was just as deserving. Spahn and Koufax both had three years as a Hero Number, with Koufax ending his career as #100 in the 1966 set (Spahn ended his as #205, a 3rd Tier, in 1965). I gave Koufax #200 because it seems like Topps was positioning him to be the next full-set hero (to take over for the bad-kneed Mantle). Instead, Koufax retired and Topps elevated Gibson and Frank Robinson to take The Mick’s place. Spahn I gave #450.

It got interesting with Mantle, Musial and Robinson, and my decision came down to the two central ideas of my take on the Topps Numbering System: statistical superiority and institutional hero worship.

Stan Musial was in the twilight of his career in the Sixties: good, not great, he didn’t play every day;,that kind of thing. Happens all the time with players, and had he played in the 1980s and 1990s, he probably would’ve ended up with a career either like Cal Ripken (one team forever with lots of money) or like Eddie Murray: twenty-some odd years with one team and then following the money to a chain of other teams before retirement. But this isn’t the point. The point is that Topps rewarded Musial with two out of his final four years at #250 (including 1963, his last). That is some Hero Worship right there. Did he deserve #250? Probably not statistically, but in the hierarchy of the Topps Numbering System, Hero Worship beats Statistics any day of the week. So then it was obvious for me to slot Musial in at #250.

Musial proved to be just a prelude to the biggest idea of them all: should I reward Mickey Mantle Statistically or should I reward him with Hero Worship? What would Topps have done? There’s no question he deserved both, but then so did Frank Robinson, as Robinson won 2 MVPs (one in each league), won a World Series with the O’s in 1966 and was undoubtedly one of the most consistent super stars of the decade. Robinson was a Hero Number five years in the Sixties, and five years a 2nd Tier.

Topps gave Mantle a Hero Number every year except 1968 (#280), capping him at #500 in his last year, 1969. Topps featured Mantle on at least 29 different cards during the Sixties, more than any other player.

Both deserved Hero Numbers, and the two most logical open slots were #350 and #500. I ended up giving Robinson #350 and Mantle #500 because I reasoned that while #350 is almost the middle of the set, with more exposure during the pack-buying and set-building year, #500 was the Sixties Hero Worship card (like #1 was to Ted Williams in the Topps Fifties). Topps gave it to Mantle in his last year—never before. (Incidentally, Frank Robinson was #500 in 1968, even though perhaps it should have been Carl Yastzremski, winner of the 1967 AL Triple Crown (instead, Yaz got #250, his only Hero Number card in the decade).) Robinson was the statistical powerhouse of the decade, so it followed that he should get the Statistical Hero Number (#350).

After these first eight, I had a pretty good handle and could identify most of the rules and quirks of a system like this:

Levels of Numbering:

1. Hero Worship (generally one card per set, usually #500)
2. Hero Number (1, 50, 100, 150 , … etc.)
3. 2nd Tier Number (10, 20, 30, 40, 60, … etc.)
4. 3rd Tier Number (5, 15, 25, 35, 45, 55, … etc.)
5. Rookies & Late Bloomers (Common Level numbers of non-established future stars)
6. Common Level Numbers (all the other numbers)

Other Things to keep in mind:

1. No players from the same team within 7 numbers of each other
2. No players with less than three years of cards in the decade (there will be notable exceptions)
3. All-Stars based on number of inclusions across the decade
4. No expansion teams (or very few cards of expansion teams)
5. No favoritism (besides Institutional Hero Worship)

A good example of ‘No Favoritism’ is the case of Lou Brock. Look at Brock’s number for the decade:

1962 (rookie) #387
1963 #472
1964 # 29
1965 #540
1966 #125
1967 #285
1968 #520
1969 # 85

Generally it took Topps about 3 years to give a worthy player a Tiered Number. Brock was no exception, and I’m not trying to suggest that I think he was worthy of a Hero Number—he most certainly wasn’t. But I gave him #285 (3rd Tier) because of his eight cards, three were 3rd Tier; it was the most accurate thing to do. If it were up to me, I would’ve put him higher up, probably a mid-500 2nd Tier.

Now that I get deeper and deeper into this, I’m beginning to realize how long it will take to get even an ‘average’ set like this right. I’ve only just gotten my feet wet, so far as identifying and numbering 27 individual players. I will post updates as I go, finally ending with a complete 598-card checklist.

Here’s what I’ve got so far:

#20 Ernie Banks, Cubs
#30 Eddie Mathews, Braves
#65 Nellie Fox, White Sox
#70 Harmon Killebrew, Twins
#80 Richie Allen, Phillies
#90 Luis Aparicio, White Sox
#107 Rusty Staub (one of those Late Bloomer/Future Stars), Astros
#120 Pete Rose, Reds
#150 Willie Mays, Giants
#155 Roger Maris, Yankees
#160 Roberto Clemente, Pirates
#195 Joe Morgan, Astros
#200 Sandy Koufax, Dodgers
#225 Carl Yastzremski, Red Sox
#250 Stan Musial, Cardinals
#260 Don Drysdale, Dodgers
#285 Lou Brock, Cardinals
#300 Hank Aaron, Braves
#320 Bob Gibson, Cardinals
#330 Rocky Colavito, Indians
#350 Frank Robinson, Orioles
#410 Al Kaline, Tigers
#450 Warren Spahn, Braves
#470 Willie McCovey, Giants
#480 Yogi Berra, Yankees player/coach
#500 Mickey Mantle, Yankees
#510 Rod Carew, Twins


If anyone has an idea for what the design of this average Topps 1960s set would look like, send it to me by email and I’ll post the best three. I’d like to see fronts and backs, as well as League Leaders and All-Star card designs.

If ever you’ve wanted to design a baseball card and have it seen by people who care about baseball cards, this is a chance to show your idea. Just remember, designs should be able to fit well with the other sets from the Topps Sixties.

Updated Food for Thought: Hot Stove Edition

A few baseball-card-related thoughts as we approach winter...

If Jon Lester signs with a team other than the Athletics—which is how it seems things will shake out—does that mean we'll never see a card of Lester in an A's uniform? This probably happens a lot, but the two players who come to mind are Reggie Jackson (Orioles) and Don Baylor (Athletics), both in 1976. Another guy who could fit this bill is Yoenis Cespedes, the slugging outfielder the Red Sox obtained in exchange for Lester. The Sox have a logjam in the outfield and the feeling is that Cespedes walks after next year.

This also brings up an interesting take on the purpose of end-of-year series like Topps Update and Topps Heritage High Numbers. Topps Update is a showcase for All-Star cards, rookies, and guys who fell through the cracks in the regular set. Heritage High Numbers is chock full of rookies and other end-of-the-bench guys who didn't get cards in the regular series. Gone are the days when traded players get cards of them in their new uniforms. Were it up to me, High Numbers and Update would be a more traditional mix of rookies and traded players. This would solve the problem of guys like Lester, Cespedes, and Nelson Cruz (whose year on the Orioles probably won't be recognized in 2015 Topps Heritage)...

...An insert set that didn't seem to hold its value is the mini set in 2014 Topps Heritage. Despite being the case hit and each card being numbered to just 100, eBay prices have fallen in the last few weeks. All of this is good news for me, as I now have 47 of the 100 subjects...

...Is Topps's design for 2015 a subtle homage to 1990's design? It'll be the 25th anniversary of that set, which could mean a possible "no-name" error, right?...

...I promise this is the last Heritage item I'll bring up for now: I've decided that the ultimate card from the Heritage set is the Maury Wills Real One autograph card. For one thing, Wills is shown as a member of the Dodgers. Secondly, he wasn't included in the 1965 Topps set, so—barring custom cards—this is as close as you're going to get to a 1965 Topps Maury Wills card. 

...Are there great card blogs still out there? From what I've read recently, collectors are more interested in posting images of their "hitz" on Twitter than talking about the bigger picture in the hobby. Is that how others see it?

Finally, I almost forgot. Remember my post in November 2013 about the future of price guides? (Read Average Real Pricing: The Future of The Price Guide.) Well, if you subscribe to Beckett's online price guide, it looks like they incorporated something like average real pricing into their tiered offerings. They're calling it the Beckett Online Price Guide Plus (very original). If it's anything like my idea for average real pricing, this is a step in the right direction. Hey Beckett, you're welcome.

The Lost Awkwardness of the Combo Card

1964 Topps "Bill's Got It"

The combo card just ain't what it used to be. Used to be, a group of players would stand around on the sidelines either before a game (most often the All-Star Game or during spring training) or during practice, and awkwardly pose with members of their own or another team. Included in every Topps set from 1957 through 1969 (with the exception of 1965), nearly every Fleer set from 1982 on, Upper Deck sets from 1990 to 1993, and random other sets (including 1960 Leaf), combo cards were exciting to receive in a pack, pushing collectors to further idolize players on their favorite teams. The photos were posed, and the titles were usually clumsy alliterations or hackneyed exposition — to entice the collector to flip the card and read the description on the back (see "Bill's Got It," 1964 Topps). The writing was usually terrible, and the connection between the players weak or nonexistent (many writers have highlighted this with great success, including Mike Kenny, our talented and hilarious contributor here at The Baseball Card Blog).

Still, it was something to get a combo card. It showed the manufacturer — and the players themselves — had a playful side, that baseball wasn't all business. We wanted our heroes to take the game as seriously as we did, but we also wanted to know they knew how to joke around. It's this idea — separation of business and pleasure — that made the combo card important to their respective sets.

2007 Topps "Classic Combo"

For Topps, the sets that included combo cards were mostly endless oceans of faces. And once the regular player photo moved off the sidelines and the action shot became de rigueur (around 1970–1972), the posed-combo-card playfulness disappeared. What makes this interesting is that when Topps re-introduced the combo card in its flagship sets beginning in 2006, the manufacturer brought it back as another vehicle for its action photography. The new Topps "Classic Combos" lack the very essence of what made those earlier examples so exciting: the inherent awkwardness of posing for a photograph as a couple or a group.

Collectors' brains are now tuned to action shots—action is all we see on sports cards. But awkwardly posed groups of players, often together for only that one photograph? You rarely see that these days. It seems like everything's scripted; that when not playing, players are ushered from one place to another by people with clipboards and headsets.

1963 Topps (left); 2012 Topps Heritage (right)

This last bit is important for how the combo-card concept has been approached in Topps Heritage sets. The Heritage brand emulates the original vintage Topps sets of the 1950s and 1960s. For combo cards, that means the awkwardness of the posed sideline group. Because of tight schedules or whatever other reason, however, players are hardly ever photographed together for Heritage sets. Instead, their images are layered over each other during production to create the illusion that they posed together. Or—and here it is again—an in-game action shot is used.

2007 Topps Heritage "World Series Batting Foes" - layered images

So to celebrate the lost awkwardness of the combo card, see below for some of my favorites. And make sure to check out The Baseball Card Blog's Facebook page for another combo card I'd like to see.