Nolan Ryan Master Set question?

sjeanblanc · March 25, 2004 8:45AM

I know this isn't a big deal to anyone other than a Nolan Ryan collector.

Now the last time I checked, Nolan Ryan's player years were 1966 to 1993. The question is, what in the heck are those 1994 Upper Deck cards doing in the Master set?

Its hard enough coming up with some of the odd ball cards, but I adding cards outside of the player years is going to open the door to all the other cards that were printed post 1993.

I am going to email BJ and petition that these be removed.

Scott Jeanblanc
jeanblanc@iconnect.net
Ebay UserId : sjeanblanc

-----------------------------------------------------
Collecting Nolan Ryan cards (68-93) in PSA 9 or better.

CON40 · March 25, 2004 8:52AM

Scott;

I emailed to get these removed too... Gayle Kean explained to me that 1994 counts because his final year stats are on the reverse... I don't buy it, but someone has them convinced these are active year cards... I agree strongly with you that these should be removed (along with any Pacific cr@p!)

Cheers!
Keith

sjeanblanc · March 25, 2004 9:12AM

Keith,

My nightmare is some sadistic @#@# sending in tons of that 91 Pacific and 93 Pacific and adding 800+ cards to the set.

If they are going to use the logic that his 93 stats are on the back, they are probably on the back of other post 1993 cards, which would make them eligible. That is crap. That opens the doors to the 94 redistribution of the 1993 Mother Cookies farewell edition, 1999 Finest, Game-used BS, etc.

The header of the Master Set specifically states his play years from 1966 - 1993 and cards issued in 1994 just don't fit.

Maybe if we collaborate on a message to BJ we can get some movement on their removal.

Scott Jeanblanc
jeanblanc@iconnect.net
Ebay UserId : sjeanblanc

-----------------------------------------------------
Collecting Nolan Ryan cards (68-93) in PSA 9 or better.

CON40 · March 25, 2004 10:42AM

Scott;

I posed that same potential problem. Gayle says they limit it to 1994 releases only. I'm not sure how that affects Mother's Cookies issues, or Pacific Advils, or whatever else came out that year. But my guess would be that anything with a 1994 copyright would qualify.

I'll call BJ and see if we can nip this one in the bud!

sjeanblanc · March 25, 2004 12:26PM

Keith,

What is really starting to cheese me off is that those cards have been in the list for around two weeks. Yet no Ryan Master collection member, with the exception being the "Emard Collection" because you can't look at it, has registered those cards. Now I believe the "Emard Collection" is King Kellogg and I know he did a big submission recently that had quite a few Ryan's in it, but I didn't remember seeing these cards there. If King Kellogg added them then I don't really have much of a problem with it, but if he didn't add them then that leaves only one other way they got there and that is from a dealer and I have a BIG problem with that.

If dealers start dictating to PSA that cards be added to Player Registry sets, so that they can plunder collectors on Ebay, because "now" these are needed cards since there in the Set Registry, that is just plain an simple WRONG! The Set Registry should be for collectors by collectors, not dealers getting cards added to a set so that they can make a killing on $0.05 cards. Unfortunately this can only happen with Player sets, but just wait until those Willie Mays collectors have to buy a 1986 Topps Willie Mays Turn back the Clock card to complete their set, or the Mickey Mantle collector who will now need the 1975 Topps Mantle and Aaron card.

Sorry if I am ranting, I just started a new job on Monday and I am looking forward to renewing my chase of the Ryan set and while its just two cards today, who knows what it will be tomorrow.

Scott Jeanblanc
jeanblanc@iconnect.net
Ebay UserId : sjeanblanc

-----------------------------------------------------
Collecting Nolan Ryan cards (68-93) in PSA 9 or better.

KING KELLOGG · March 25, 2004 1:34PM

sjeanblanc...

CON40...

The new additions to the Master set are my doing.

"The Emard Collection" is also KING KELLOGG. I'm a collector, just like anybody else...

I didn't know this would upset anybody.

Larry Emard

CON40 · March 25, 2004 1:52PM

Scott;

First off, congrats on the job! Nice to hear you'll be an active player on nice Ryan stuff! It's been a little boring lately...

King, king, king... ohhhh... 530 cards was not enough, huh? Having to consider 1994 issues for the Ryan set is a little irksome. I understand as a collector you may like those 94 cards, but I (and obviously Scott) have never really considered them to be Ryan cards... I had an awful lot of input on the Ryan Master Set with BJ and 1993 was the original agreed upon cutoff because that was the last year he pictched actively... And since there is so much stuff available prior to 1994, do we really need to consider those as part of his Master Player Set? This is not a player who had only 18 cards issued during his career...

I don't want to put you off, my experiences with you have been great. I hope to have more! But, if we open up 1994, that will ultimately add at least another 30 cards to the Master Set. Personally, I don't want to have to consider those cards to make a "complete" player set.

Any chance you could recant those 94 issues? I'll even give you a couple earlier Ryan cards to make up the difference in your set! Not kidding!

peterredshoes · March 25, 2004 2:37PM

At the risk of stirring the pot more, I'd like to throw in favor of seeing those "year after retirement", "final stats", or whatever cards on player set registries.

I feel that there's a big difference between these and other post-retirement cards. Foremost, they are frequently found even in the most basic of sets, and in many/most cases do not even commemorate the player's retirement. In some cases they are even manufactured before the player announces his retirement, although this may not really be that meaningful of a distinction since release dates tend to get lost in favor of just associating a set with a particular year. But just based on the first point, I believe that from a collecting standpoint a '94 Upper Deck Ryan has much more in common with the '93 Upper Deck Ryan than it does with, for example, his '00 Fleer Greats of the Game card.

Additionally, I think it provides a little continuity with the fact that a player's rookie card is often issued the year after his first appearance in the majors (although there's enough variation in rookie card vs. major league debut to make this highly debatable; especially for late-blooming first round draft picks!).

Peter G.

jonnyrock · March 25, 2004 2:38PM

It would seem to me that letting someone else dictate to you which cards of a specific player constitue a "Master Set" is unnecessary.
Don't collect cards becuase someone else tells you which ones need to be in your collection, collect them becuase you enjoy doing so.
Remember why you collect cards to begin with, and I hope that you will find that making a big fuss about some $.25 1994 UD Card is pretty rediculous (as is sending that card in to be graded in the first place).
As a lifelong Ripken collector, I see no reason why I should send off 90% of his cards to be graded. I'm happy to have 10's of the more difficult stuff (82-84, etc). But other than that, why send out a 2000 Topps card to be graded??? Just doesn't seem to make sense to me. If someone would explain to me why I am wrong here I would be interested.

NickM · March 25, 2004 5:10PM

I can think of a number of HOFers who had at least one card issued the season after they retired, and those cards IMO should be included in their master sets. They are regular cards of the player featuring his active career.

Here are a few:
Mickey Mantle
Sandy Koufax (league leaders)
Brooks Robinson (highlight)
Phil Niekro
Johnny Bench
Gaylord Perry
Carl Yastrzemski
Roberto Clemente
Willie Mays (World Series card)

There are probably dozens of others, but it's late.

Nick

CON40 · March 26, 2004 1:19AM

I see no reason why I should send off 90% of his cards to be graded. I'm happy to have 10's of the more difficult stuff (82-84, etc). But other than that, why send out a 2000 Topps card to be graded??? Just doesn't seem to make sense to me. If someone would explain to me why I am wrong here I would be interested.

johnnyrock;
As a player collector, I consider those newer, cheaper cards as the "commons" in that player's collection. If you look at any player's "set" of cards, you'll have the RC (most expensive), the Star cards (pricier), Minor Star cards (moderate), and the Commons (cheapest). And some of those commons are hard to find high graded, hence it's worth ponying up extra to complete your set. It's really not unlike collecting a single set, except it crosses multiple years.

Nick;
Good point on the other actively "posthumous" cards we consider as active cards... especially that 1969 Mantle and 1973 Clemente! I see that as a key Mantle card, yet he wasn't playing. Perhaps I need to think more about this.

King;
You have forced me to use my thinking cap! With the plethora of 1994 issues, I never wanted to consider these as real Ryan cards... but, given Nick's evidence and how I feel about some of those classic issues, I may be wrong to toss those 1994s aside. Hmmmm. This is what makes collecting a reward! I feel like quoting Corleone: "Just when I thought I was... they pull me back in!"

Scott;
These are some valid points brought up! I'm thinking about going to their side here... but I still want all those Pacifics burned if effigy!

Cheers!
Keith

pebblyjack · March 26, 2004 1:19AM

Just last year I sought to add a 1994 Collector's Choice Silver Signature George Brett PSA 10 to the Brett master list (he retired in 1993, like Ryan) and was told that 1994 would not be added to Brett's Master Set. Since, Brett first appeared in the majors in 1973 and his rookie year was 1974, but his first card is 1975, I have always thought that 1994 should be included in his Master Set. Plus, it makes a nice round number of 20 years worth of cards. So, if anyone from PSA is listening???? (I will collect them regardless, but the Registry seems to bring those cards to the market).

Thanks

Randy

mikeschmidt · March 26, 2004 1:35AM

<< <i>

If dealers start dictating to PSA that cards be added to Player Registry sets, so that they can plunder collectors on Ebay, because "now" these are needed cards since there in the Set Registry, that is just plain an simple WRONG! The Set Registry should be for collectors by collectors, not dealers getting cards added to a set so that they can make a killing on $0.05 cards.

Scott Jeanblanc
>>

First off, my thoughts on the issue: The Mike Schmidt Master Player Set includes both the 1990 Donruss and 1990 Upper Deck cards, commemorating his career. I do not feel it is "wrong" to have these in the Registry - because they are regular issue cards that look back on his career, right after his retirement. If you exclude those, you almost have to exclude the 1989 Fleer Update, too. Since it is only three cards - I think they should be there and it is not a big deal. It might be a totally different issue for players retiring later (when there are more card companies abound)

Secondly - Scott, your thoughts quoted above probably don't hold water long-term. I don't know any dealers that are trying to "plunder" player collectors like you and I. Some definitely do make money on the 10s they turn - but they really aren't making much, if any, money on the PSA 8s and PSA 9s. You always have the choice not to bid, too. There is a theoretic limit on the number of cards that will be in any retired Master Player Set - and, odds are, collectors will move to get those included sooner or later. Why blame the dealers who have started the process? The Mike Schmidt Master Set once stood at only 94 cards. It is now 322 and will be 400 or so before the end of the month - with a theoretic limit pushing 500 or so. It will grow that big, whether I participate or not, whether I bid or not, or whether I submit or not. I appreciate your efforts, Scott - but I think your anger is misplaced here. If you are angry that the set is so big - don't let it bother you. You already have an awesome Ryan graded set. Don't let the Registry dictate your interests.

MS

sjeanblanc · March 26, 2004 1:49AM

Hi guys,

Without knowing for certain until today that those cards were added by King Kellogg, I guess I don't have a problem with it. It just opens the door to more cards being added, thus creating the never attainable goal of 100% completion. As it stands today there are at least 1000+ Pacific cards from 1991 and 1993 that are not part of the Nolan Ryan Master set, and frankly I don't want them to be part of it. The reality though for those cards is that they are from his player years and thus could be legitimately added.

The thought that was in my head before King Kelloggs post was that those cards were added by a dealer just to rape more collectors. So long as it is collectors adding cards to the Player Set registry for collection sake that is GREAT! Tally Ho, I'm in the game.

The day that dealers start adding cards to the Player Set registry for the express purpose of getting rid of "worthless cards" for "Dollars" on Ebay at the expense of Player Set participants who would then need that card for set completion purposes, I have a BIG problem with. Hopefully it will never happen, but with DSL and 4 Sharp Corners its just a matter of time. IMHO.

Scott Jeanblanc
jeanblanc@iconnect.net
Ebay UserId : sjeanblanc

-----------------------------------------------------
Collecting Nolan Ryan cards (68-93) in PSA 9 or better.

sjeanblanc · March 26, 2004 2:05AM

Hi MS,

I'm not angry, maybe frustrated would be a better word. I have pretty much given up on picking cards up on Ebay, because at least at this point I am unable to participate in a bidding war. Probably 95% of my pickups from here on out are going to be from my own submissions. The problem is finding some of these cards. Kudos to you on the OPC and Puerto Rican Schmidts that you found. OPC's are the bane of the Ryan collector as they permiate every year of his career, with the 70's stuff being very hard to come by in even PSA 8 condition.

It just gets disheartening some times to be in a race and keep seeing the finishing line attached to a string that keeps getting pulled away from you. But like any collector I'm in for the long haul.

Scott Jeanblanc
jeanblanc@iconnect.net
Ebay UserId : sjeanblanc

-----------------------------------------------------
Collecting Nolan Ryan cards (68-93) in PSA 9 or better.

Nolan Ryan Master Set question?

Comments