Or would I be wasting my time ... ?

liffeystynx

Although I had resolved not to start on any new sets, I recently had the bright idea that surely many of the cards already in my Mike Payne’s 300 Greats set would fit nicely into an MVP set. So I was a bit disappointed to discover that the existing 1951-Present MVP set consists of any graded card of the various MVPs rather than a card associated with the particular year they won the award. Given that these are supposed to be Key Cards, surely it makes sense that a set would consist of specific cards associated with the award.

So I’m wondering whether any of you would be interested in a registry set consisting of the regular Topps card (1952-present) of the MVP in each league for that year. I realize that Topps base set cards of recent years aren’t of much value – but who’s to say that in 20 years time these sets, as exemplified by the best players in each league each year, won’t make for attractive representatives of these times. It also marks out the Topps base sets as a constant in this hobby for over 50 years now.

Anybody else find this an attractive prospect?

Jonathan

GlynRParson

good idea

Griffins

there is no '55 Topps for Campanella, nor '62 Topps for Maury Wills.
Can't fix the Wills, but if you include Topps, Bowman, Fleer and Leaf and make it post War ('48 on) you'd make it a bit more complete.

liffeystynx

Just discovered the Campanella omission for myself ... was unaware of the Wills one (was probably aware before, but became unaware with passage of age, drink etc.).

I guess what I'm looking for is a key card set that doesn't descend into the realms of chrome-refractor-pants-swatch-1-of-1s as we reach the modern age. What are the criteria for Basic Player Sets (as opposed to Master Sets)? Maybe the way to go is that any card from the player's MVP year that qualifies for his Basic Player Set would be eligible to represent him in this set.

Any other thoughts?
Jonathan

liffeystynx

… or here’s a more radical idea – how about any PSA-graded card or coin issued in the year the player won the MVP?

That way there is no player omitted, you can use favorite cards you already own and you can make it as cheap or expensive as you like. Weighting would go out the window, but that’s the situation at present on a lot of key card sets.

Any takers?

Jonathan

WinPitcher

Wills has a 63 fleer card that could be used or a 75 Topps card that has a 62 Topps Wills with mantle


I prefer using the card of the following year. that way it shows what the guy did to earn the award and in many cases it even says so too.

I have been doing it that way for quite some time and I go back to 61 for the AL and 62 for the NL.

The ROY set I go back to its inception 1947.

Cy Young also to its inception.

Steve

liffeystynx

Winpitcher,

I take your point about the following year, especially as the photo would ususally be from the MVP season, but I still feel there's something special about a card produced in the same calendar year. For instance, if you're marking Carl Yastrzemski's amazing season in 1967, isn't his 1967 Topps card more iconic than his '68 (and not just because of the burlap borders)?

As for Wills, there are a number of regional and oddball items to represent 1962 - for instance this Salada coin currently on eBay:

1962 Salada coins #127 MAURY WILLS (blue) Dodgers PSA 8

What does anyone else think - the year itself or the following year?

Jonathan

tkd7

I like the idea of the MVP year rather than the following year.

I also like the idea of a regular Topps card for that year. There will be gaps for cards that weren't issued, but so what? I'm convinced that collectors have a certain "completion" complex (I'm guilty myself) that doesn't allow for gaps, but hey, thats the way life and sports are.

You could have an alternate MVP master set, that includes whatever issue from that year. Better yet, make it a master type set that doesn't allow any duplication of manufacturer/issue. There are some HOF sets like that.