Autograph "team sets" - advice?

burghman

Hi all. New guy here, so I appreciate anything you can offer to help me out and let me know what you'd do if you were in my shoes. I'm posting because some of the threads in the Autograph forum suggest posting here to get more eyes.

Back in the early '50s, my father obtained single signed "paper baseball" autographs for many major league players. These are a mix of stars and regular players, as shown in the Brooklyn Dodgers sample below:

I don't know if these are legit or signed by a ballboy, but I'm obviously curious so I'm thinking of beginning the authentication process and perhaps encapsulation for protection. Is the value of having "a lot of the Brooklyn Dodgers from '52-'53" higher than the individual autographs. Should I only deal with the bigger names being authenticated, encapsulated, and potentially graded to maximize their appeal, or should I plan on being in it for the long haul with everybody once I get started so that they're all in the same state?

I'm wondering if folks see value in consistency and keeping them together - all/none encapsulated, all/none graded - vs. breaking them up. I'm also trying not to throw my $s away with unnecessary authentication / encapsulation / grading fees if it doesn't make sense for these items. Thanks in advance.

miwlvrn

If you suspect they could be real as opposed to ballboy signed or something like that like you mention in the OP, then the answer depends on whether you intend to keep them or sell them. If real and if they were mine, I'd prefer they were authenticated and holdered. You can sub these in to PSA/DNA under the blue-flip service.

If you think there is a legit chance that they are fakes, then start by only sending one or two in to PSA/DNA at first. That way, you're only out the fees for a little bit instead of the amount it costs for all of them, if they are deemed questionable authenticity. If the stars are real, it is unlikely that the commons are fake.

yoda99

In the last name "Hodges", that large loop in the g looks unusual for his autograph. Check his graded autographs and see if you ever see a large loop like that with the g. Note that I'm talking about the "g" in his last name. I only looked at the Gil Hodges auto, I didn't look closely at any others.

burghman

@miwlvrn said:
If you suspect they could be real as opposed to ballboy signed or something like that like you mention in the OP, then the answer depends on whether you intend to keep them or sell them. If real and if they were mine, I'd prefer they were authenticated and holdered. You can sub these in to PSA/DNA under the blue-flip service.

If you think there is a legit chance that they are fakes, then start by only sending one or two in to PSA/DNA at first. That way, you're only out the fees for a little bit instead of the amount it costs for all of them, if they are deemed questionable authenticity. If the stars are real, it is unlikely that the commons are fake.

Good advice - thank you.

Yoda99 - thanks for taking a close look, and it just goes to show how little I know in this area. I saw the fancy G, H, and the circle dotting the ‘i’ and figured it was a sure thing. It’s those little details that I’ll have to review on my other autographs to make wise submission choices. Much appreciated.

Stone193

Hi and welcome!

These Dodger sigs are awesome!

I have no ability in figuring out what's real and what's not.

The Campanella was signed before his accident in 1958 - and if real? It's a keeper! And from my "limited" perspective? Looks good.

Hodges died in 1972 - so IMO his sig is on the rarer side.

Lasorda didn't join the Dodgers until 1954 - wonder if that one was added later on? No stitching in the ball?

My take? If a "tough" sig comes back authentic? I'm guessing they're all OK.

I would send in the Hodges, Campanella and Robinson - if they come back authentic? You're in!

I'd be proud to have these in my collection of Dodger stuff.

edit: also Zimmer didn't join till 1954.

burghman

@Stone193 said:
Lasorda didn't join the Dodges until 1954 - wonder if that one was added later on? No stitching in the ball?

Thanks Mike! Lasorda signed the unstamped side of the “paper ball” The stitching is on the other side. I haven’t found any Lasorda comparisons where his first name is close - the other authenticated examples on PSA show more of a printed ‘T’. All of them being in what looks to be the same blue pen has me nervous too, but I have to assume that pen options in the early ‘50s were much more limited than nowadays!

I’ve often wondered if these things were from ‘53 or ‘54 (or maybe both and more) because there are some anomalies (like you mention) when I go back and look at historical rosters.

Ironmanfan

they all look genuine to me
very cool!
IMF

burghman

Thanks for the advice guys - you've convinced me to put together a submission but I have my homework to do. In digging a bit deeper, I've found a couple duplicate autographs of "common" players that are so completely different that it's hard to believe they're both real. Neither of these guys were rookies, so I can't really mark them down to not having an established autograph...

Mike Sandlock

Tom Wright (last 2 are nearly identical, first is way off but maybe he wasn't on a solid surface?)

I'm not planning on subbing these, and luckily (or unluckily) I don't have dupes of my high end names to create these kind of worries. I'll be taking a much closer look at autograph samples, though, before submitting anything!

Thanks again for the advice.

Stone193

On the Mike Sandlock, the sig on the left appears like the ones he signed on his '53 and 54T cards - the one on the right looks totally different - plus he signed a lot - you can nail his sig for a couple of bucks right now on eBay.

All of the Tom Wrights may just be variations of how he signed - they all look like his IMO.

What's my opine worth? The price of "admission" to our forum.

burghman

I sent in my autograph submission on Fri - authentication and encapsulation. Now I’m having second thoughts about not including grading so I was wondering... What’s the value of autograph grading? Seems to me that it’s less of a measuring stick than it is for cards. An autograph earning a PSA 10 doesn’t seem to me that it should be worth exorbitantly more than a 9 like we see with cards. Am I wrong?

I’m excited to see the results - I sent in a couple Cy Young’s, a Mantle, the Campanella, Robinson, and Hodges from the first scan above, and a couple others. Cost a pretty penny, so I’m crossing my fingers.

burghman

Got some mixed results that have thrown me for a bit of a loop with my "paper baseball" autographs... Campy, Jackie Robinson, Gil Hodges, and 2 Stengels all came back questionable while an early Mantle and 2 Cy Youngs that I thought were the shakiest of the lot were each authenticated. Hard to be too upset when the Young's were confirmed, but the failure of those 5 has me wondering about the rest of the collection. Just one company's opinion, though, and I was prepared to accept 8 failures so I'm trying to keep a positive outlook but damn if it doesn't sting a little.