There are a couple of distracting marks in the Mets circle above Koosman's head. I don't pretend to be an expert but my eyes do not consider this an elite example.
Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.
<< <i>There are a couple of distracting marks in the Mets circle above Koosman's head. I don't pretend to be an expert but my eyes do not consider this an elite example. >>
Agreed, these issues (in addition to unseen ones that don't come through the scan) would keep it out of a 10 holder. Still I wouldn't mind owning this one though!
I'll agree with the OP on the corners being fantastic on this card, but for me on the 68s it's about centering and print quality. The burlap design hides many corner/edge flaws from the front, so those are personally a much lower priority on this issue.
The old cert no. and the new flip with the hologram indicates this card was either recently reholdered or bumped up on review.
Very nice card.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I always get a kick out of these threads, as this is one of the only places on earth where a card like this gets more criticism than it does praise.
That Ryan is awesome - end of story.
COME ON, MAN! >>
Completely agree when looking at a scan of an iconic card that I would love to add to my personal collection from afar. However, if I am a collector considering throwing my hat in the ring and dropping north of 17k on this card then the microscope and criticism are appropriate.
Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.
<< <i>I always get a kick out of these threads, as this is one of the only places on earth where a card like this gets more criticism than it does praise.
That Ryan is awesome - end of story.
COME ON, MAN! >>
Not sure why someone wouldn't like that card - I agree - it looks pretty good to me.
I always think the same thing about cards like this and the Clemente, e.g., which is at 70K.
I'm always amazed at how much one would spend on one piece of cardboard - I know it's relative - I'm just always amazed. Plain and simple.
<< <i>However, if I am a collector considering throwing my hat in the ring and dropping north of 17k on this card then the microscope and criticism are appropriate. >>
Maybe to some level this is true, but upon any level of inspection there's no dispute it's in the right holder. This is fantastic card, no obvious glaring flaws - it is absolutely worthy of this holder.
Thanks to the OP for calling attention to this by the way!
I've really started to think of these higher end cards as being more like works of art, because each one of them is indeed a little different and unique. They're definitely not "commodities" in different grades - this Ryan is in a very rare and different class of 1968s.
I think it's almost silly to try and compare these high end cards to themselves - to me it's similar to arguing over who has the nicest Ferrari.
It's a freakin' Ferrari, man! Just enjoy it and be happy for whoever wins - I'll be cheering them on, this would be a fantastic add to even the best of collections.
Great corners and worthy of the grade assigned, but it's gotta be dead nuts left-right for me, personally for my own PC, to plunk down that loochie. Also, of all designs the 68 burlap tends to hide corner wear very well, in terms of eye appeal. Anytime there's such a steep price jump from one grade to the next, I personally gravitate to high end examples on that lower of those two grades-- in the Ryan RC case 8s and 7s.
Well said Bounce. This card is a beast and deserves to be in that holder.
Elite cards receive criticism similar to elite athletes. LeBron James is an example that comes to mind. There is no argument that he is an iconic basketball player and everyone would love to have him on their favorite team. However, each game he plays is dissected and critiqued beyond belief to point out any flaw regardless of how minor that flaw may be. The '68 Ryan is an iconic card and when a PSA 9 is presented for discussion it receives similar criticism regardless of whether it is deserved or not. Anyone would love to add it to their collection but because of what it means to the hobby and the price tag attached puts a bulls eye on it.
Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.
Berk, I agree with lots of that analogy, but would respectfully fall just short of saying that every collector would love to have every high grade card, such as this particular Ryan. What one chooses for their collection is a very subjective thing, and depending on what aspects of a card one can or can't live without, there are technically worthy 9s and even 10s (or lower grades that are high for Pre War, where 9s and 10s usually don't exist), that some guys wouldn't want, despite the technical merits.
Matty, I completely agree with your point. Most post-war card collectors would love to have ANY '68 Ryan with eye appeal acceptable to the individual collector in their collection. I wasn't referring to only this example or only high grade examples. A great point was mentioned previously about the '68 Topps set regarding the unique design camouflaging corner and edge wear thus we have all viewed examples of this card with great eye appeal in all grades.
Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.
I sure hope no one thinks I'm critical of someone spending a lot of money on a card?
I'm not.
I've been collecting for almost 40 years and consistently for 25 - these cards went for way, way less money when I started - so that's where my amazement comes in.
Many factors have changed the fabric of the hobby landscape - maybe a fun thing to discuss in another thread?
gregf
Posts: 146
Comments
front is not perfectly centered and rev has a tilt.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
<< <i>I would say very nice but not blazing.
front is not perfectly centered and rev has a tilt. >>
Yes, sir. I also don't like the yellow looking line on Koosman's side.
<< <i>I would say very nice but not blazing.
front is not perfectly centered and rev has a tilt. >>
This is clearly a Topps card though right? I recall the previous discussion about the Milton Bradley variety and was curious.
Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.
-George F. Will
<< <i>There are a couple of distracting marks in the Mets circle above Koosman's head. I don't pretend to be an expert but my eyes do not consider this an elite example. >>
Agreed, these issues (in addition to unseen ones that don't come through the scan) would keep it out of a 10 holder. Still I wouldn't mind owning this one though!
<< <i>This is clearly a Topps card though right? I recall the previous discussion about the Milton Bradley variety and was curious. >>
Yes, this is definitely a Topps and not MB.
<< <i>
<< <i>This is clearly a Topps card though right? I recall the previous discussion about the Milton Bradley variety and was curious. >>
Yes, this is definitely a Topps and not MB. >>
Thanks, thought so.
This 55 Clemente is no slouch either:
Clemente
Heritage has some super high resolution scans on their site for this card if you follow the link above.
<< <i>One man's blazing is another man's mehh >>
I'll agree with the OP on the corners being fantastic on this card, but for me on the 68s it's about centering and print quality. The burlap design hides many corner/edge flaws from the front, so those are personally a much lower priority on this issue.
Nice card tho.
That Ryan is awesome - end of story.
COME ON, MAN!
Very nice card.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I always get a kick out of these threads, as this is one of the only places on earth where a card like this gets more criticism than it does praise.
That Ryan is awesome - end of story.
COME ON, MAN! >>
Completely agree when looking at a scan of an iconic card that I would love to add to my personal collection from afar. However, if I am a collector considering throwing my hat in the ring and dropping north of 17k on this card then the microscope and criticism are appropriate.
Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.
-George F. Will
<< <i>I always get a kick out of these threads, as this is one of the only places on earth where a card like this gets more criticism than it does praise.
That Ryan is awesome - end of story.
COME ON, MAN! >>
Not sure why someone wouldn't like that card - I agree - it looks pretty good to me.
I always think the same thing about cards like this and the Clemente, e.g., which is at 70K.
I'm always amazed at how much one would spend on one piece of cardboard - I know it's relative - I'm just always amazed. Plain and simple.
<< <i>I'm always amazed at how much one would spend on one piece of cardboard - I know it's relative - I'm just always amazed. Plain and simple. >>
If I had it, I would spend it. Whatever makes you happy.
Assuming I had my "mansion on the lake", "gaggle of jet skis", and "boat-that-contains-another-smaller-boat" problems taken care of first.
<< <i>However, if I am a collector considering throwing my hat in the ring and dropping north of 17k on this card then the microscope and criticism are appropriate. >>
Maybe to some level this is true, but upon any level of inspection there's no dispute it's in the right holder. This is fantastic card, no obvious glaring flaws - it is absolutely worthy of this holder.
Thanks to the OP for calling attention to this by the way!
I've really started to think of these higher end cards as being more like works of art, because each one of them is indeed a little different and unique. They're definitely not "commodities" in different grades - this Ryan is in a very rare and different class of 1968s.
I think it's almost silly to try and compare these high end cards to themselves - to me it's similar to arguing over who has the nicest Ferrari.
It's a freakin' Ferrari, man! Just enjoy it and be happy for whoever wins - I'll be cheering them on, this would be a fantastic add to even the best of collections.
Instagram: mattyc_collection
Elite cards receive criticism similar to elite athletes. LeBron James is an example that comes to mind. There is no argument that he is an iconic basketball player and everyone would love to have him on their favorite team. However, each game he plays is dissected and critiqued beyond belief to point out any flaw regardless of how minor that flaw may be. The '68 Ryan is an iconic card and when a PSA 9 is presented for discussion it receives similar criticism regardless of whether it is deserved or not. Anyone would love to add it to their collection but because of what it means to the hobby and the price tag attached puts a bulls eye on it.
Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.
-George F. Will
Instagram: mattyc_collection
Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.
-George F. Will
I'm not.
I've been collecting for almost 40 years and consistently for 25 - these cards went for way, way less money when I started - so that's where my amazement comes in.
Many factors have changed the fabric of the hobby landscape - maybe a fun thing to discuss in another thread?