The disappearing Hall of Fame set ???

HalleyGator · January 15, 2002 10:19PM

Last week my request for a MLB Hall of Fame set had made it as high as #5 on the mainstream list. I was pumped after months and months of anticipation ...

Now it has disappeared from sight.

I can only hope that this means they are working on it RIGHT NOW ??

HalleyGator · January 16, 2002 7:57AM

Oh Lord ...

the silence and lack or encouragement is scaring me.

carkim · January 16, 2002 9:16AM

Halley,

I wish I could help, but I too am in the dark.

Carlos

HalleyGator · January 16, 2002 7:42PM

Carlos (and others):

Do any of you know of any other sets that were near the top of the list that have also disappeared???

mikeschmidt · January 16, 2002 9:56PM

Well the 1976 Topps set was actually there but is now gone...

RayBShotz · January 16, 2002 11:28PM

1976 Topps Baseball is very conspicuous in its absence!
RayB69Topps

ElGuapo · January 16, 2002 11:53PM

...and the T205 Gold Border set

carkim · January 17, 2002 1:19AM

I emailed BJ about this and am awaiting a response. I too am concerned about the 1976 Topps Baseball set. I just picked up a vending box and won't crack it open until the cards are listed on the Registry. Then (if the cards look good) I may start sending them in for grading.

carkim · January 17, 2002 1:26AM

WOW...BJ is fast!!! She responded to my email in less than 5 minutes with this reply...

That's bizarre! Those sets should still be on the list. I'll fix it!

Carlos

HalleyGator · January 17, 2002 2:00AM

And THAT, Carlos, is why you will be the CHAIRMAN of our new Collector's Council!!!

yawie99 · January 17, 2002 7:59AM

just curious: how would a hall of fame set registry work?

HalleyGator · January 17, 2002 10:11PM

Would you like the full "can of worms" or just half of what you are opening??

I have discussed it with BJ many times, so the details are not known, but essentially:

Every player in the Hall of Fame who has a PSA gradable baseball card would be in the "set". This would obviously EXCLUDE people like managers, executives, umpires, etc. Just the PLAYERS who have cards.

Then, they would "weight" the players based on their star potential. Aaron, Ruth, Cobb, Mantle etc. would be 10 points each ... all the way down to obscure guys like Eppa Rixey and Edd Rousch who would be worth about 5 points.

Then they would weight again for the rarity of the card (age, rookie card, etc.) An 1895 card should be worth much more than a 1995 card. A rookie card should be worth much more than the player's final card 20 years later.

Lastly, they would weigh again for the PSA grade: 10=10, 6=6, etc.

Example: A PSA 9 1954 Hank Aaron rookie card should be worth much more than: a PSA 5 of the same card, a PSA 9 card of the same player 20 years later (1974 Aaron card), and a PSA 9 rookie card of a lesser player (Phil Neikro, etc.)

RayBShotz · January 17, 2002 11:27PM

Halley - This set seems extremely ambitious both for the collector and for PSA's databaser's to set up this type of registry. The innovation of such a set would cross the set lines of all of the vintage set collectors. How would you expect PSA to deal with the request of someone who say, has a 1975 Set already registered that includes a George Brett (HOF). Since the registry software wont allow you to enter the same cert.# twice, how will this collector also enter his Brett in the HOF registry?
If you intend on listing all the cards for each HOF'er this set will be monumental in size. It would be no wonder why PSA would be in a quandary how to tackle this.
Have you worked out the total details for this set with BJ? How confident is she that PPSA can make this happen? If you have a complete outline of how this will work, email me. Thanks.
RayB69Topps
Aja4rayb@msn.com

r00kies101 · January 18, 2002 3:14AM

Another thing to consider is in 20-25 years down the road, some of the modern players from the 90's will make it into the HOF. I can't imagine PSA even trying to put together all the cards ever produced of let's say Kobe which there are probably already hundreds (thousands?) made and he's only been playing 5-6 years.

Maybe they can do a Hall of Fame set by Decades. Even with that it will still have conflicts of possibly registering a card twice that RayBShotz pointed out. But, if PSA can do it, I think it would be good for the hobby.

qualitycards · January 18, 2002 3:36AM

HALLEYGATOR - I'm a little cofused in your ommision of Hall Of Famers that are not players. Walt Alston is in several sets as a Dodger manager, why wouldn't they count? As a player, I believe he had 1 at bat and struck out, and he has no cards available as a player. Why would umpire HOF cards like the '55 Bowmans be excluded too? Thats one of the great features of that set. In the 1956 Topps set, the first 2 cards are of Harridge and Giles, both worthy Hall Of Famers albeit executives. The '54 Topps sets has some neat cards of HOF'ers as coaches, Earle Combs & Heinie Manush quickly come to mind. And of course what about the 1940 Play Ball set that has tons of retired stars (mostly HOF'ers) included, like Lajoie, Wagner, Goslin, Keeler, Lazzeri, Hooper, Cochrane etc...They aren't listed as coaches, mgrs, umps, but they are clearly not active players as some retired 2 decades earlier. Would they count in the registry? In my opinion, I think if the HOF set can exist, every member of a set that's a Hall Of Famer should be included, regardless of their status. ...jay

NickM · January 19, 2002 6:47AM

I agree with Jay. Cards featuring HOFers should be added, whether the HOFer is listed as a player, coach, umpire, etc, and whether he made the Hall primarily as a player or otherwise. The only sets I would exclude are those designed as reprint or tribute sets (e.g., Topps Archives, UD Legends, UD Decade of the 70s, '96 Topps Mantle reprints).

Nick

mikeschmidt · January 19, 2002 10:28AM

The jury is out for me on this issue.

Every Hall of Famer has a card -- but a significant number of them only have *stupid* cards. For example, PSA grades the Metallic Hall of Fame set, issued in 1981-198?, which is basically a metallic representation of their Hall of Fame plaque. There is the Baseball Immortals set, Perez-Steele, etc.

For some Hall of Famers, most notably 19th century and Negro Leagues, it just isn't relevant to include them in a Hall of Fame Registry -- not if they don't have a card worth more than $10!!

However, I think anyone that appears in a regular-issue, vintage set should be in the registry. This includes the umpires from 1955 Bowman (but not any subsequent umpire baseball card sets), Giles, coaches, etc.

Sparky Anderson's first card is his 1959 Topps Phillies card. Yet he is going into the Hall of Fame as a manager, not a player. For him, I think this 1959 Topps card is considered his rookie card -- not any of his manager cards...

MS

NickM · January 19, 2002 2:53PM

After thinking about it some more (and reading mike's post), I would amend my suggestion as to what sets should be considered to be more case-by-case on vintage cards. '51 Topps Connie Mack's All Stars wouldn't be covered by my initial definition, but these cards were a very important issue of their time.

Here's a thought about how to handle creating the HOF registry - take the individual sets already listed on the registry and copy out the HOFer cards into a HOF registry database. As sets containing HOF players are added to the registry, those HOF cards can be added to the HOF registry. As far as grade weights go, if they are to be used, I would just lift the weights directly from the individual set that the cards came from.

Nick

qualitycards · January 20, 2002 12:10AM

My comments (rantings) were specifically about vintage sets. I wasn't even thinking about Hall Of Fame type sets like the mettalic cards or Colons.
And if you look in the SMR you will see a designation of (HOF) to signify each Hall Of Famer and as NICK pointed out it can be taken off the regular registries onto a seperate entity...jay

Alfiewt · January 21, 2002 9:27PM

Hal,

Do you have a checklist of all of the cards that you think should be included in the Hall of Fame set? Giving BJ a checklist of the card would probably help get your set listed faster and make BJ's job easer.

HalleyGator · January 22, 2002 4:24AM

I have now provided BJ with:

- The checklist of all the HOF players who should appear in the set

- The "weights" for each player's star status. The Top 20 players of all time (Ruth, Aaron, Cobb, etc.) are worth 10 points, the next 20 (Koufax, Snider, Kaline, etc.) are worth 9 points, the next 40 (Carlton, Feller, Yastrzemski, etc.) are worth 8 points, the next 60 (Appling, Medwick, Wilhelm, etc.) are worth 7 points, and the rest are worth 6 points (Aparicio, Hafey, Hooper, etc.)

- The "weights" for the rarity/scarcity factor of each individual card. All 19th century cards are worth 10 points, all cards from 1900-1916 are worth 9 points, all cards from 1917-1935 are worth 8 points, all ROOKIE cards from 1938-1959 are worth 10 points, all non-rookie cards from 1936-1949 are worth 7 points, all non-rookie cards from 1950-1959 are worth 6 points, all ROOKIE cards from 1960-present are worth 9 points, all non-rookie cards from 1960-1969 are worth 5 points, all non-rookie cards from 1970-1979 are worth 4 points, and any non-rookie cards from 1980 until the present are worth 3 points. (The player's rookie card will be as defined by the Sports Market Report, since this is after all a Collector's Universe website!)

BJ is on top of things, and all of us are truly lucky to have someone who works as hard as she does working for us!!!

The disappearing Hall of Fame set ???

Comments