Home› Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

Which T206 Hall of Famers are considered rookie cards?

CARDSINLOSANGELESCARDSINLOSANGELES Posts: 302 ✭✭✭
in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

I know this is a silly question in that you can always find some super obscure local issue, but just as the 33 Goudey Ruth is considered to be a "rookie" card by many, which t206 cards are?
Zack Wheat I know, but what else?

Comments

  • CWCW Posts: 1,231 ✭✭✭
    edited December 31, 2018 8:05PM

    Good question, never thought about it. This thread over at Net54 has some great info on the subject. Looks like only 3 could really be considered "rookies", although the Speaker is debatable.

    LINK TO THREAD

    QUOTED FROM THREAD:
    (Originally Posted by h2oya311)

    Speaker - I have struggled with classifying his rookie card to date. Most have generally accepted that his t206 is his rookie card. But there are a few postcards that pre-date it: the 1908 Little Rock Travelers Team PC and the 1908-09 Rose Company Poscard (if it exists). Until recently, most would have considered the Novelty Cutlery PC to have pre-dated the t206 since it was categorized as having been issued from 1907-09. To date, no Novelty Cutlery PC's have had a cancellation date prior to 1910, which is why Jeff (bicem) believes them to be a 1910 issue.

    Wheat - here's an interesting one. There are several cabinet photos that pre-date his 1910 T206. There's a 1900's Kelso Studio Cabinet Card, a 1906 Prairie Roses Team Cabinet, and a 1906 Cabinet (showing him in a Union City uniform). For some reason, I have always though of the 1909-12 PX7 Sweet Caporal Domino Discs as his rookie card, but don't ask me why.

    Marquard - The T206 of Marquard (w/ 150 back / hands at side) is often thought to be his rookie card by collectors, although I would prefer the few minor league cards that pre-date his T206, namely the 1907 Canton Ohio Team PC and/or the 1908 Indianapolis PC (where he is incorrectly named "Charles Marquard"). Additionally, there is a 1908 Hall's Studio Cabinet of Marquard, although I'm not sure I've ever seen one before, I've only seen it checklisted. Obviously, there are a few concurrent cards from 1909, but not many, so I think it's okay to call the Marquard (hands at side / 150 series) a "rookie" card as well.

    I don't think any other HOF player in the T206 set should be considered a rookie card other than the three listed above. Coming to a consensus on "true rookie" is a herculean effort that won't be resolved in this thread (or ever). <<

  • UnknownUnknown
    edited December 31, 2018 8:24PM
    This content has been removed.
  • Desert_Ice_SportsDesert_Ice_Sports Posts: 285 ✭✭✭

    Who in the world considers '33 Goudey to be Ruth's rookie? 1933 was Ruth's 20th season in baseball...

    DesertIceSports.Com

  • shagrotn77shagrotn77 Posts: 5,631 ✭✭✭✭

    @Desert_Ice_Sports said:
    Who in the world considers '33 Goudey to be Ruth's rookie? 1933 was Ruth's 20th season in baseball...

    Beckett. And, yes, it's moronic.

    "My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
  • shagrotn77shagrotn77 Posts: 5,631 ✭✭✭✭

    I agree with Speaker, Wheat and Marquard.

    "My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,818 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @shagrotn77 said:

    @Desert_Ice_Sports said:
    Who in the world considers '33 Goudey to be Ruth's rookie? 1933 was Ruth's 20th season in baseball...

    Beckett. And, yes, it's moronic.

  • KbKardsKbKards Posts: 1,782 ✭✭✭
    edited January 1, 2019 10:00AM

    Moron implies an IQ in the range of 50-74.
    https://beckett.com/search/?term=1933+goudey+rc&year_start=1933
    When you call 238 out of the 239/240 cards from the 1933 Goudey set Rookie Cards then it suggests either an IQ a step or two below that, or attempting to cater to an audience with an IQ at or below that.

  • emaremar Posts: 697 ✭✭✭✭

    As a HOF RC collector, I've had to designate a 1st card category. My preference is the more mainstream brands (T206, Goudey, Bowman). I believe Beckett provides the 1st card category checklist. RC is deceptive.
    Grover Alexander, I'll have to include the Cracker Jack model

  • Desert_Ice_SportsDesert_Ice_Sports Posts: 285 ✭✭✭

    "When you call 238 out of the 239/240 cards from the 1933 Goudey set Rookie Cards"

    I'll just add this to my long list of reasons to NEVER AGAIN submit a vintage card to Beckett for grading.

    I'm all for small government, but I seriously think it should be illegal for anyone at Beckett to touch a card that was produced prior to 1980.

    DesertIceSports.Com

Sign In or Register to comment.