Question About 80's Hockey RCs

vintagefun · January 5, 2014 7:42AM

How much more desirable is OPC vs Topps in Hockey RCs?

While I know the decision is mine, I'm really torn and would appreciate opinions.

There are 7-8 Hockey RCs that I want. The way I'm spending is $1000 needs to get me 6 cards, with at least 1 from each of 4 sports. Hockey is usually gonna be 10-20% of budget, with exception of Gretzky which will be an anchor card.

Guys like Messier and Coffey only have OPC, so that's clear. The price of Gretzky likely puts me into a Topps example. But some of the others like Bourque, Mario, Roy, and Hull is where my question lies.

While SMR would suggest a roughly 1 grade decrease for same budget (PSA9 Topps = PSA8 OPC roughly), in which case I'd likely prefer OPC. But what I'm seeing on eBay is roughly 2 grades. At which point I think I'd rather have for instance a Topps Roy in a 9 over a OPC in a 7. Obviously SMR is simply a guideline, and I'm nowhere near as versed in hockey as the other sports, so any opinions or advice are appreciated.

At the end of the day, how would you spend ~$125 (or any budget really) Would it be a higher grade Topps or a lower grade OPC? Would you always choose 1 over other, is is there a point at which the other is ok?

Thanks guys!

Time4aGansett · January 5, 2014 8:07AM

I am in the same boat in thought as you for this project. I wanted to do the same thing as you, and put it on the back burner because I didn't know which direction to go either.
I grew up in the USA, so I collected Topps as a kid. The hobby recognizes OPC as the more collected and preferred brand. As such, OPC would be the way to go, especially investment wise. But the centering is brutal on these cards, and may be cost prohibitive, especially when you are trying to get the best quality card for your collection.
Buy the best quality card you can afford, whether it is Topps or OPC. High quality cards will always be in demand, no matter the manufacturer. This will assure your investment down the road, and allow you to have the cards you can enjoy in your collection. If funds were not an issue, OPC is the way to go.
Good luck!

aro13 · January 5, 2014 10:20AM

For Ray Bourque the OPC 8 and the topps 9 are similar values. For Mario Lemieux the OPC 8 and the Topps 9 have similar values. For Roy the OPC 8 definitely sells more than the Topps 9. The Hull OPC 8 and Topps 9 sell for similar values.

Given the similarity in price (other than Roy who I would buy the OPC version) I would check the POP report and see if there are more OPC 8's than Topps 9's in the cards you are looking for. The one with the lower POP would be the one I would pick up given that the prices are the same.

oddity · January 5, 2014 10:34AM

When I collected PSA graded hockey, I avoided Topps like the plague. Not quite sure why now. Seems like the market was much stronger for OPC then. If I was going to pick up hockey again, I would prefer a slightly lower grade OPC to Topps, although I have no reasonable argument as to why. That's just they direction I would head.

hyperchipper09 · January 5, 2014 10:45AM

<< <i>When I collected PSA graded hockey, I avoided Topps like the plague. Not quite sure why now. Seems like the market was much stronger for OPC then. If I was going to pick up hockey again, I would prefer a slightly lower grade OPC to Topps, although I have no reasonable argument as to why. That's just they direction I would head. >>

That's me now

. Well , I don't avoid Topps like the plague I suppose but I'm always going after OPC before Topps. If my memory is correct, the only year in the 80's where the print run was equal, or maybe even higher(more OPC) in Topps' favor was 89/90. I think that's the Leetch/Sakic RC year. Blue borders. Unless somebody is hoarding a lot of 80's OPC(always possible I suppose. Uncut sheets anyone?) I believe there's a significant amount more of Topps from 79/80 - 88/89.

oddity · January 5, 2014 10:57AM

It certainly seemed like Topps was more readily available for sale at cheaper prices. Not sure about 89/90. All I remember about that year was seeing some really fugly Sakic PSA 10's when I was looking for one of him...

ThoseBackPages · January 5, 2014 12:17PM

Yes, 89/90 is the only Hockey release where Topps > OPC

PMKAY · January 5, 2014 1:30PM

If you lived in Canada you wouldn't dare collect 80s Topps over OPC. lol

PMKAY · January 5, 2014 1:32PM

Having said that (and I do live in Canada and grew up in the 80s collecting hockey cards) the Topps 80-81 issue is an intriguing one. The players name does not appear on the back of the card and you had to scratch the front of the card to see the player's name on the front. That set doesn't get a lot of love and for some reason values don't seem to differ on scratched vs unscratched. It's a very unique issue.

slum22 · January 5, 2014 2:15PM

I am not a big hockey collector but my two cents would be a vote for OPC. For the same reason that Topps beats OPC in baseball, OPC beats Topps in hockey. I believe there are far more collectors from Canada who collected OPC vs. Topps, just as there are more baseball collectors in the US who collected Topps vs. OPC. Those collectors will go back to what they collected in the past. So OPC should have greater demand than Topps for that reason. Then factor in the fact that OPC probably has less supply than Topps in hockey (this is reversed in baseball) and I believe you have your answer.

Steve

BostonAmericans · January 5, 2014 11:04PM

My .02 - being an American I collect Topps where Topps and OPC have sets in the same year. However, since Topps stopped doing hockey, I collect OPC. I like the designs of the cards (call me old-fashioned) and they are good for base set collecting.

Cakes · January 5, 2014 11:49PM

Vintage, nice questions, thank you.

Frozencaribou · January 6, 2014 2:34AM

Hi,

The pop's aren't a great indicator for 80's Topps vs. OPC hockey. It's like the inverse of Topps vs. OPC for baseball. There are a few exceptions but by and large OPC hockey is more desirable than Topps in the 80's. Canadians don't really collect 80's Topps hockey at all in comparison to OPC. The upside to going with OPC over Topps is continuity in RC selection. Chelios, Neely, Gilmour, Messier, Hawerchuk, Francis, Stevens, MacInnis, and many others didn't have Topps rookie cards so you will need OPC no matter.

-Nathanael

hyperchipper09 · January 6, 2014 2:53AM

<< <i>Hi,

The pop's aren't a great indicator for 80's Topps vs. OPC hockey. It's like the inverse of Topps vs. OPC for baseball. There are a few exceptions but by and large OPC hockey is more desirable than Topps in the 80's. Canadians don't really collect 80's Topps hockey at all in comparison to OPC. The upside to going with OPC over Topps is continuity in RC selection. Chelios, Neely, Gilmour, Messier, Hawerchuk, Francis, Stevens, MacInnis, and many others didn't have Topps rookie cards so you will need OPC no matter.

-Nathanael >>

Very good point about many of the rookies.

msassin · January 6, 2014 7:31AM

Personally - I'd rather take a lower grade OPC

Regardless - I would definitely go OPC over Topps when it comes to Brett Hull...he was double printed in Topps and they made a lot of product that year.

Jess418 · January 8, 2014 12:23AM

I live in Canada, I collect hockey and I think for most of us Canadians, Topps cards from those years are more like oddballs... I have a few in my collection, but I wouldn't chase them, unless Topps had a different version than the OPC version (the 1988-89 Wayne Gretzky card, for instance). I guess that's how most of you guys in the US feel about 70s and 80s OPC baseball cards...

eagles33 · January 8, 2014 1:32AM

I've decided to go for all OPC for the 80s hockey rookies that I need. I settled with lower grade OPC over topps. I don't really have a good reason why I decided on OPC. I think it's just because that's what I think of when I think of hockey cards. I'm by no means an expert when it comes to these either but the one piece of advice I can give is if you are buying raw is only buy if there is a rough cut. Even ksa or bgs slabbed cards I would pass if there isn't a rough cut.

miwlvrn · January 8, 2014 1:57AM

<< <i>I've decided to go for all OPC for the 80s hockey rookies that I need. I settled with lower grade OPC over topps. I don't really have a good reason why I decided on OPC. I think it's just because that's what I think of when I think of hockey cards. I'm by no means an expert when it comes to these either but the one piece of advice I can give is if you are buying raw is only buy if there is a rough cut. Even ksa or bgs slabbed cards I would pass if there isn't a rough cut. >>

Are you doing Topps for Sakic & Leetch?

miwlvrn · January 8, 2014 1:58AM

* and Linden?

VitoCo1972 · January 8, 2014 2:01AM

I agree about the OPC > Topps sentiment in the 80's for sure but I don't necessarily think the same holds true for '68-'79. Particularly '68-'74. The cuts on those OPC cards are so awful that it's not even the same set. I collect Topps through 74 before my collection switches to OPC.

miwlvrn · January 8, 2014 2:30AM

<< <i>I agree about the OPC > Topps sentiment in the 80's for sure but I don't necessarily think the same holds true for '68-'79. Particularly '68-'74. The cuts on those OPC cards are so awful that it's not even the same set. I collect Topps through 74 before my collection switches to OPC. >>

There are some cards that stand out for Topps, such as the 1971 Gordie Howe card that isn't in the OPC set.

I think there's something to be said for ease of completion and accessibility of those earlier Topps sets since they don't have all that many cards in them. Problem is the higher number OPC's that aren't included w/ the Topps version often include some HOF RC's, regardless of decade of issue.

The 1973 Topps set might be the worst condition right from the factory set I've seen. The centering is generally horrible and I'll take the OPC version on that one for sure.

Question About 80's Hockey RCs

Comments