Official 1971 Topps Baseball Discussion Thread

gosteelers · January 21, 2006 2:18PM

I didn't take the time to look to see if there's an 'official' 1971 Topps Baseball thread, but, I just got into this set about a month ago or so (hey, it was the year of my birth!). Anyway, I love this set. Can we discuss? Can any of the veterans point me in the right direction as to what's tough/what isn't, etc? I know Raymond's a bi$ch to get in 8 from what I've seen...

Mark

ArnyVee · January 21, 2006 2:57PM

I don't think that I'll ever take the plunge into the '71s...just way too darn frustrating with those borders and 8s being a very tough challenge. But, good luck with your quest!

gosteelers · January 21, 2006 3:15PM

Arny,
The 8's in this set are so darn inconsistent...

Mark

Eddo33 · January 21, 2006 10:49PM

I started working on the set about 4 years ago but stopped this past year because it got pricey. And I was only getting them in 6's and 7's.

If your collecting this set in 6's or 7's, let me know. Since your a Steeler fan I'll cut you a break.

Can't wait for 3:00pm today.

Ed

ArnyVee · January 21, 2006 10:59PM

Although I'm not rooting against either team, I am actually rooting for the Steelers a bit more. Gotta give the Bus and Cowher their Super Bowl victory!

In regards to the '71 set, I love it and I wish that I have the patience one day to start it. But, after going through what I've gone through for the '72 set (quite a bit easier to find in 8s and higher shape without absolutely breaking the bank) it's certainly a tough challenge that I'm not going to be taking on anytime soon.

Now, I've decided to keep my sets at 400 cards and under with the '85 Topps Football (another black bordered beautiful set) and the '85 Leaf Baseball Set (again, another black bordered set).

What do 7s run for the '71s? And, are they readily available since the 8s and 9s aren't so easy to find?

Eddo33 · January 21, 2006 11:09PM

The SMR is pretty accurate on the 6' and 7's. Some go higher then they list, (Clemente, Rose) but for the most part the SMR is good.

Machodoc · January 21, 2006 11:52PM

I've always enjoyed the 1971 set and have the current finest #1 set which was also the top 2005 set. The timing of this thread is ironic because I was interviewed last week for an upcoming SMR article on the set, which probably won't roll around for a few editions. Back last June I posted the piece below for another card forum I'm very fond of and even though it is quite out of date I thought I would post it for background purposes (I completed my set last October and it took a little less than a year from start to finish). I can add more later as I've updated the pop numbers, etc...if anyone cares. Here goes:

Last week I broke 90% completion on my 1971 Topps set and thought I would share some notes on the set. Currently there are only four complete sets registered, and only two of those have a GPA over 8.0. The four complete sets ranks it in the middle of the 1970 through 1975 issues for completion; the 1970 and 1973 issues have only two complete registered (one on the 1973’s is mine!), while the 1972, 1974, and 1975 have more. Currently my set is ranked #10 at 91% complete with an 8.04 GPA. It has nothing below PSA 8, about 30 PSA 9’s and no qualified cards, and I hope to finish it out around 8.05 to 8.10. I started this set last November with a large purchase of 220 cards from a single collector (I already had about 40 HOF’ers and other favorites at the time) and have been active on eBay and with dealers plus submissions. My set has not been open for viewing for quite some time owing to the competition of eBay for these things.

While discussions of condition rightfully focus on the back borders, I think that sort of obscures the centering difficulties I have encountered with this set. The absence of an extra border between the player photo area and the border of the card itself can sometimes mask centering problems which drive me nuts when sifting through raw cards. At Fort Washington I must have looked at 300+ cards at Norty’s table, and had to put back at least a dozen I needed because of centering, and this was only the most recent time I’ve gone through that process.

Ironically, looking at pop numbers would leave people with the impression that this is perhaps the best-centered set of all early to mid 1970’s issues. Out of 62,440 graded cards, only 2.1% of the 1971’s are qualified (of course not all of those are o/c’s), compared with 3% for 1970, 5% for 1972, 4% for 1973, 4.5% for 1974, and 3% for 1975. I guess maybe people just don’t submit the o/c’s as much for the 1971 set as for others, but pops aside, my experience with raw 1971’s is that I reject far more for centering rather than for condition reasons.

Returning to condition for a moment, I don’t think it would surprise anyone that the 1971 set has far few cards graded 9 or better than any set of the 1970’s. Only 4% of the 1971 set is graded 9, and only 0.1% (82 cards) are PSA 10. The 1971 and 1972 sets both have 52% graded PSA 8, but the difference is that the 1971 set has a far greater portion – 34% - graded PSA 7, while all of the other sets between 1970 and 1975 average between 14% and 17% PSA 7. About 16% of the 1972 set is PSA 9 (1% PSA 10), while the 1973 set is 25% PSA 9 (1% PSA 10), 1974 is 29% PSA 9 (1.3% PSA 10), and the 1975 set is 17% PSA 9 (0.6% PSA 10). All of these numbers exclude qualified cards.

The only cards with any real variations in the 1971 set are three checklists, #123, #206, and #619. The first two have red versus orange cap differences while the first one has a centering variation on its card number. Checklist #619 has three variations, a line or no line through the helmet brim, and a “no copyright” variation. Card #123 has mid to low end pops but its “number centered” version has a pop of only 4 (I’ve never seen one sell); while the rare pop on #619 is the “no line on brim” variety which has a total pop of 7.

As for the regular issue cards the lowest pop card in 8 or better is #536, Claude Raymond which has only 9 in PSA 8 and 1 PSA 9. I recently bought one on eBay for just over $215. The cards with the lowest overall pops are #351 (Shellenback) and #434 (Sutherland) with total pops of 28, while four cards (#352, 398, 585, and 588) have total pops of only 30.

Nolan Ryan is the most popularly-graded card in the set with 1,561 total of all grades (16 PSA 9’s no 10’s), followed by Clemente’s 939 (15 PSA 9’s and one 10). Jim Longborg #577 is commonly thought of as one of the tougher cards in 8 or better but in fact there are at least 45 cards with lower PSA 8 pops that this one, which has 21 in 8 and 47 of all grades.

Finally a word on the market for 8’s and better (I don’t buy or track 7’s). A typical PSA 8 common currently sells for between $12 and $20 on eBay, while 9’s only rarely go for less than $100 and average between $110 and $200. The overall market for PSA 8 1971’s is pretty healthy, especially when compared to the rest of the early 1970’s issues. PSA 8 late series cards 524 through 643 generally go for $18 to $25, while the high numbers (644 and above) are all over the place according to pops. I’ve paid as little as $15 and as much as $75 for a lower pop common high number.

This set is a ton of fun with multiple challenges. My two cents.

Steve

Eddo33 · January 22, 2006 12:56AM

Steve, Congrads on such a great set. I look forward to reading the article.

Funny, the thing that got mt started collecting 71's was an article I read in SMR about 4 years ago..... I'm sure after yours comes out there will be a few collecters that jump on that band wagon!!

Go Steelers!!!!!!

Axtell · January 22, 2006 9:22AM

I have put my collecting of this set on hold, and have to agree, the grading of 8s that I've seen has been very up and down. Some I see are amazing, others I scratch my head and wonder how it got slabbed an 8. I am only working the set in 7 (with some 8s if I can get a good enough deal), but it's a monster.

I may pick it up again when I finish the 85 football set, but I've been enamored of this set since I saw the Munson way back when I was a kid in the early 80s.

Good luck on the set...it's definitely a monster (can only imagine doing so in 8).

rounding3rd · January 22, 2006 10:01AM

I've been toying with the idea of starting this set. Right now my '71 set consists of Ted Simmons PSA 7!! However, I have picked up a few raw cards that I will be submitting with my freebies for renewing by membership. If the grades come back stellar, it may push me into attempting this insanity!!

Mike

dakota · January 22, 2006 5:16PM

Steve,
Great write up and congrats on a great set. Would like to hear from collectors that have submitted many of the cards in this set rather than those who have purchased the bulk of it already slabbed.
A little history on this set..... Chris Renaud had one hell of a set before he was treated so unkindly on these boards. A few years back a complete PSA 8 set sold in the 25,000+? range privately and then I believe the same set was sold in a major auction house for approx 16,000k a couple years later.
Regardless of what the pop report says the following are very tough cards....Raymond for sure #1 with Phil Regan right there with Claude. Lonborg is still very tough to find a legitimate 8 copy. Slocum,Brewer,Jim Qualls,O'Donoghue,Wegener,Sutherland,and Willie Davis to name a few can be frustrating to find centered.
A really great set when in high grade. I have found recolored cards in almost every collection/set that I have looked at. So beware. Seems like the magic marker was at work long before grading came along!!!
Long live the Black Beauties!!!!

imafishinnut · January 22, 2006 11:27PM

I completed my set back in March 2005. It has a GPA of 7.38 and is listed in the registry as Baseball Nut's Dream Set (Link to My Set). My set includes scans of each of the cards including most of the variations and several PSA/DNA authenticated autographed cards. Check it out if you want to see what the various cards look like. It is a fun set to build, but it is a very time consuming process to complete it on a budget. Mine was completed in just over 3 years at about 70% of SMR. At this point, my set is pretty much complete and will not be upgraded significantly. My set was build to keep and I am very satisfied with its current state.

Most of my set was completed through purchases (Ebay and the PSA boards), but I did try my hand at submitting some of the cards myself. With my personal submissions, I received about 80% PSA 7s, about 20% PSA 8s and never received either PSA 9. I found it very difficult to get PSA 8s or better through my submissions. Most of my personal submissions are noted in my set.

Here are the variations I currently have and are pictured in my set:

Checklist #123: Red Helmet / Card # Center, Red Helmet / Card # Right, and Orange Helmet / Card # Right
#265 Jim Northrup: With Blob and Without Blob
#306 Jim Nash: With Blob and Without Blob
Checklist #619: No Copyright / No Lines, Copyright / No Line on Brim, Copyright / Wavy Line on Brim

Unfortunately, PSA is not good a recognizing variations. If you submit the variations for grading, I doubt that they will get them correctly labeled. Eventually, I am going to go on a crusade to get them to correctly label all of my variations.

If you have any questions, do not hesitate to email or PM me.

Good luck with your set,
Mike

Kurtman9 · January 23, 2006 2:14AM

Below are the reasons that I would never attempt to compile this set in high grade. Just too hard to get 8s on them...

imafishinnut · January 23, 2006 2:26AM

I have a bunch of PSA 7s that look like that too. My original plan was to upgrade my set by getting some nice raw cards that I have graded. So, I submitted about 60 of the best that I had. After getting no PSA 9s, only about 10 PSA 8s and the rest PSA 7s, I decided it was just too expensive of a proposition. IMHO, buying the cards already graded is the only cost feasible way to build the set in PSA 8 or better.

Regards,
Mike

Machodoc · January 23, 2006 11:11AM

I was able to complete my set so easily because I hit it at a lucky time when Steve Peckovich, Scott Tipton, and another unnamed seller through Andy Madec were selling their sets and the market was flooded with 8's. This happened between late 2004 and early summer 2005. In fact, a deal with Scott got me the last 130-odd cards I needed.

The only 7's I have in my set are the #270 Carty and #207 Foster. Carty is a toughie and is the second toughest card in PSA 8 or better in population after the Raymond card. Here's the current ranking of the toughest cards by high grade population:

CARD / TOTAL POP / # PSA 9 or BETTER / # PSA 8

#536 Raymond 40 / 1 / 12
#270 Carty 44 / 1 / 14
#733 Maye 44 / 0 / 15
#662 Hedlund 45 / 0 / 16
#288 Moeller 43 / 0 / 18
#294 Dunning 43/ 1 / 19
#351 Shellenback 38 / 0 / 20
#689 Baker 45 / 0 / 20

Having done both sets I think the 1971 set is tougher than the 1972 despite its somewhat smaller size. Once you get to 750 cards however, who cares if it's 752 or a 787-card set, eh?

SW

IJustLoveCards · January 23, 2006 1:42PM

I have been upgrading my raw set andlooking to buy all the stars in 8's. I love looking at the cards, each card is in a top loader, I love the fact that I pull out the huge monster box and I can pull the cards out and look at them. After doing so many sets in all psa graded form, I am finding the raw set just satisfying, especially these beauties. I realize the real value is in getting them all slabbed for resale, but I just cant bring myself to doing it. I love this set in raw form. I think the 71 set is the true card collectors set, and the difficulty in this set in high grade is so much under appreciated by the average collector.

rob71rgd98 · January 23, 2006 9:14PM

rob71rgd98 · January 23, 2006 9:36PM

It has been forever since I responded to a PSA Set registry thread, but I could not pass this one up.

I am Rob (rgd98 on the set registry) and I have one of the 100%, PSA 8+ 1971 sets on the registry. In fact, at one point I was the #1 set, but Chris Renaud flew by me and I have not been #1 since. I was 12 years old in 1971 and this set was my favorite as a kid and continues to be my favorite. I kept most of my cards from childhood but not one of those cards are in my PSA-registry set; they were handled by a 12 year old boy and would never grade PSA 8. About 6 years ago I came across a large, raw collection of '71s that was in beautiful condition, about 500 cards. About that time, Superior Sports had a collection of 54 PSA 8s up for auction, that I won. This was the start and the base of my current collection. From the raw collection, I submitted and received many PSA 8s and a few 9s. Included in the 9s were 2 Killebrews, one of which is still in my collection, and a Clemente. I also got an 8 in Clemente and, regretfully, I decided to sell the Clemente 9. I sold that card at a show and used the funds to purchase a NM raw 1968 complete set. I still regret that decision somewhat, but then I do like the '68 set also. Basically I traded a '71 Clemente for a complete '68 set; not a bad trade but I still wish I still had that Clemente.

Since that beginning, I built the set with a combination of my own submissions and purchase of already graded cards. The current set is a mixture of about 50/50 own submissions vs. purchase of already graded cards. I was fortunate to start this endeavor when you could still find very nice raw cards for a reasonable price. Of my PSA 9s, about 75% were from my own submissions and the others were purchased already graded. I hesitate to purchase 9's because many of my 8s look just as nice and the 9s are so darn expensive.

The toughest card is no doubt the Raymond- very rarely centered. I am fortunate to own the only 9 of that card (which I bought already graded and paid alot for). Others have correctly listed most of the other tough cards. Munson #5 is definitely a very tough card along with Rollie Fingers, #384. I also agree that centering is very difficult for this set, especially with the semi-high numbers, #525-633. For some reason that series contains many of the toughest cards to find centered, e.g. Raymond, Lonborg, Willie Davis, Jim Brewer, etc.

I have not done any upgrading for awhile on this set and while I still watch the 9s on ebay, I probably won't be doing much upgrading unless I see a great deal, which is very rare for 9s from '71.

1971 is, in my opinion, the finest Topps set from the '57-'73 era of cards. And the black borders make it that much more desirable, IMHO.

Rob

Machodoc · January 24, 2006 3:11PM

I've thought more than once that 1971's were originally a bear to grade because what's the standard when you look at them for the first time? Of course you can apply all of the usual criteria of corners, stains, paper damage, etc... but with those totally black borders that also form the card's general background behind the photos, how exactly would you measure O/C? It's not always easily apparent on first glance to exactly gauge that a card is 60-40 or something similar.

Those all black backgrounds and edges create other unique problems. When nearly all other cards have a discrete white border (except the 1968 set where the "canvas" background actually obscures the edge damage) against what standard do you decide one card is a 7 or an 8 based on edge wear and chipping? These are just a few of the things that make the 1971's so maddening.

SW

QUIK · January 25, 2006 11:04PM

Hello, can you guys tell me if you think higher pop cards i think will 7 are worth gradeing. Im guessing lower pops would be right? Thanks Jeff

Fabfrank · January 26, 2006 1:23AM

I completed this set around May/June of last year aslo. It took me about 2-3 years. My initial goal was to just do the set in PSA 7, but as I picked up 8's at a reasonable price, I raised the bar a little. I've siad it before and I truly believe that 7's in this set are a tremendous value. Dealers and most collectors don't submit cards hoping to get a 7. IMO most 7's are borderline 8's or mistakes. I don't actively upgrade this set (Augustaman lets me know when he has extras or upgrades for my sets. Seems Bill knows my sets better than me

)
For anyone just starting out on this set I would suggest beginning in PSA 7. Since 7's seem to hold their value and when an 8 comes along you can sell the 7 to offset the cost of upgrading to an 8.

Writer11 · January 26, 2006 1:24AM

For anyone who hasn't already seen it, there is another Claude Raymond on eBay right now:

http://cgi.ebay.com/1971-Topps-536-C-Raymond-Montreal-Expos-PSA-NM-MT-8_W0QQitemZ8754915080QQcategoryZ55925QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

gosteelers · January 26, 2006 1:44AM

Claude Link

lostdart58 · January 26, 2006 1:56AM

GOSTEELERS,

Just a suggestion........You can make this the "Official 1971 Topps Baseball Thread" by going back to the first post you made in this thread ..........at that post press EDIT and then change the name of the thread....

...only you as the starter of the thread can change its name...........

gosteelers · January 26, 2006 2:02AM

Thanks, Lostdart. I just updated it!

augustaman · January 26, 2006 2:12AM

My suggestion is unless you have deep deep pockets,
go with a NM 7 set. I believe it will hold its value well
and is much more affordable. My personal set (now at
100% with a gpa of 7.79) was built as a PSA 7 set. If I
remember correctly, when I hit 100% the gpa was about
7.10. Since then, I have moved to other sets but still pick
ups 8's when the price is right. I would never imagine
getting into a bidding war for a Raymond card but as you
can see, I been able to upgrade significantly.

Also, for anyone looking to start or add to the '71 set, there
are several registry sets marked "extras" or "trading set"
where you should be able to pick up a nice chunk at once.

Fabfrank - Thanks for the kind words. "Our" next mission....
1978 baseball or bust !!!!!

rob71rgd98 · January 26, 2006 8:02AM

It is interesting to see the Raymond card up for auction along with the Curt Flood, which is 1 number away from the Raymond card (#535 and #536). Flood is a very easy card to find centered and in high grade while Raymond is almost impossible. Even the current example is not centered all that well. As I said earlier that series (525-633) has alot of cards that are often O/C, but there are many other cards in that series that are very easy to find in 8 or even 9. Frank Howard, #620 is a minor star but that card is so easy to find in high grade you should never pay much above $10.

rob71rgd98 · January 26, 2006 8:19AM

Other cards that are tough to find in high grade:
25 Gaston
26 Blyleven RC
60 Bosman
114 B Conigliaro (Tony C #105 is very easy to find)
258 Green
261 Knowles
270 Carty (very tough!)
288 Moeller
294 Dunning
459 Lefebvre
536 Raymond (of course)
546 Matias
549 Brewer
561 Obrien
573 Kranepool
575 Freehan
577 Lonborg
581 R Nelson
585 W Davis
596 Jorgenson
608 Wegener
609 Durocher
617 Dalrymple
626 Patek
634 Regan
635 Murcer
650 R Allen
651 J Robertson
655 Epstein
662 Hedlund
704 Martin
708 Nagelson
723 Romo
731 Qualls
733 Maye
743 Odonoghue
745 Alomar

Some of the tougher star cards include:
5 Munson
250 Bench
264 Morgan
300 B Robinson
384 Fingers
600 Mays (very often O/C, even when graded straight 8. Be careful with this card if you don't like "sliders")

Easy star cards include 530 Yaz, 550 Killebrew, 570 Palmer

frankhardy · January 26, 2006 10:24PM

<< <i>Arny,
The 8's in this set are so darn inconsistent...

Mark >>

Yes they are... and the 7's... and the 6's!

frankhardy · January 26, 2006 10:27PM

Kurtman9,

That is insane. Those are some nice 7's. I have gotten some 8's that looked like that.

frankhardy · January 27, 2006 3:46AM

I would like to get y'alls opinion on this card. What is the grade on this? There is no hidden flaws like wrinkles or staining. Back is clean and centered. Here are the scans.

The fading on the left border is NOT on the card. It is on the scanner.

Kurtman9 · January 27, 2006 4:14AM

Frank:

That is a really sharp Fuentes. I would normally say lock 8, but after my last 71 submission, I will never again say lock 8 on a 71. I received 31 7s in the submission along with 41 8s. I thought all 72 of them were lock 8s. I think I caught Darth Grader on his period.

bri2327 · January 27, 2006 4:31AM

i was really big into that set until about a year ago when I noticed the pop's on 8's increasing by the day......i had roughly half the set in 8, but then a few of the big dealers....DSL, etc starting pumping out 8's like crazy and prices started to drop. It scared me away from paying top $$ for alot of the supposed low pop cards, and I am glad I got out when I did....I have seen dozens of cards selling for less than 1/3 what I paid for them as close as 2 1/2 yrs ago.

Other than that, an absolutely incredible set that I would certainly pursue if $$ was no object.

Machodoc · January 28, 2006 3:23PM

One reason the 1971's are a sentimental favorite is that it has the last Ernie Banks card. Otherwise, what's not to like about a set that roughly 40 HOF'er cards in it?

Steve

gregmo32 · January 29, 2006 4:28AM

Does anyone have a PSA 9 Yankees Team #543 that they will be willing to sell?

Krems · January 29, 2006 1:38PM

I thought about doing the set graded as well, but got more 7's than 8's so quickly got discouraged. I am holding onto some of the graded stars though. There is not a better looking card than a sharp 1971 with the black borders.

On a side note, I am trying to complete two partial 1971 raw sets in EX/MT or better. One I need 22 cards to complete and the other over 100 including some stars. If anybody has some extra raw 1971's let me know.

gosteelers · January 30, 2006 10:52AM

I got excited about this BIN when I first saw it, but then...

Please say OC in the description!

gosteelers · February 9, 2006 11:14PM

Does anyone know what a 1971 Topps PSA 8 of Willie Stargell usually goes for? One just ended last night for about $37-$38 and there are no completed auctions for Stargell 8's. I didn't know if last night's ending price is the norm?

ColleSystem · April 11, 2006 2:16PM

Hi:

I have started a 1971 registry set, it is titled "6 Years before Star Wars!". In reading about the set, I see the standard condition sensitive comments and how cool the black looks, and I completely agree. I also would like to add that the action photos of this set are second to none. I am also collecting a 1975 baseball registry set, and the photography on alot of the cards in the two sets couldn't be more different..... Bob Gibson gearing up on the mound! Nolan Ryan in the delivery! Joe Morgan at the plate! Thurman Munson at home plate! The list goes on and on. This set rocks and to me is one of the most beautiful sets of the 70s and 80s.

-Scott

ColleSystem · April 12, 2006 10:46AM

I just got in a reggie jackson and a tom seaver, both psa 7. I have looked at these for about a 45 minutes, they both appear to be trimmed. Their serial numbers are two apart. Unfortunately, I cant seem to get good enough scans for you all to check out. The Jackson tapers off between 1/16" and 1/32". The Seaver card is ridiculous, the cut is not even straight, it angles in and then back out again. It makes me question the 8 Clemente I got with them that is graded in the same serial number range. I guess I will return them to the seller, what a shame.

-Scott

HoofHearted · April 22, 2006 12:13PM

Hey, all,

This was a fun thread to read. I learned a lot about the '71s, which I didn't collect because I was a junior in high school and too busy with girls and sports to collect bbc's.

I was visiting antique stores with my wife today and found some nice looking cards at one store. I ended up buying a '71 Carew because I like Sir Rodney so much and thought this was a well-conditioned card. After seeing Kurtman's scans of PSA7s, this card I bought would probably be a 5 at best! I paid $15 for it so I overpaid, but I figured I couldn't lose because I'm going to put it into my Senators/Twins type collection (replacing Luis Tiant)...

Thanks for the education!

hh

Twinsthreepeat · April 22, 2006 1:22PM

Here is my only graded 1971 card. It is from my Oliva set a 1 o 3.

Axtell · April 22, 2006 2:14PM

Beauty of a nine, twin.

Seems that there has been an uptick in 71 listings as of late.

bobwilley · April 25, 2006 7:05AM

Wow, I just got a great bunch of 1971's back and will be listing shortly on eBay.
Over a hundred PSA 8's, mostly commons.

#686 Chico Ruiz PSA Gem Mint 10 Pop 1
#657 Jose Azcue PSA Mint 9 Pop 1
#83 Mets Rookies PSA Mint 9 Pop 2
#124 Don Gullett PSA Mint 9 Pop 7
#101 Les Cain PSA Mint 9 Pop 2
#154 Cesar Gutierrez PSA Mint 9 Pop 4
#572 Jerry kenney PSA Mint 9 Pop 7
#291 George Culver PSA Mint 9 Pop 5
#293 Pat Corrales PSA Mint 9 Pop 11
#221 Dave Morehead PSA Mint 9 Pop 5
#87 Jack Heidemann PSA Mint 9 Pop 3

A few special cards:
#513 Nolan Ryan PSA VG-EX 4
#525 Ernie Banks PSA EX-MT 6
#600 Willie Mays PSA EX-MT 6 MC
#709 Major League Rookies Baylor PSA NM 7
#709 Major League Rookies Baylor PSA EX-MT 6

Coming soon to an Auction .... Check them out

pandrews · April 25, 2006 7:14AM

can anybody tell me specifically what to look for on the #369 checklist? i notice the pop report shows 3 variations.. i'm pretty sure i have the "red helmet" version, but what does the "red helmet with black line" look like?

edit - nevermind i found what it should look like..

guybrarian · July 11, 2006 3:24AM

Not sure why discussion of this great set has dried up; hope to restart it. It seems like the floodgates on eBay have opened up and many great cards from the set have been made available recently. Are sellers trying to capitalize on the feeding frenzy of PSA 8's and 9's before the pop numbers get too high on some of the tougher cards? I've only recently began to collect this set, but I'm getting the sense that some of the prices of the more elusive cards are beginning to come down. What do the veterans think? Is it just part of the cyclical nature of the supply and demand at the moment?

Mefer · July 11, 2006 3:57AM

I agree. The prices in general seem to have come down. I have been able to pick up a ton of 8s to boost my set up to almost a 7.5 gpa (Matt's Beautiful Birth Year Set on the registry). I am past 96% and coming down the home stretch on finishing the set. After that, I will continue to upgrade stars I need to 8s together with semi and high commons if the price is right.

guybrarian · July 11, 2006 7:02AM

How long has it taken you to build your set? Do you find yourself getting impatient as you near the end? I would imagine a smart approach would be to think of set building as a marathon as opposed to a sprint...

markj111 · July 11, 2006 7:54AM

I just picked up a well centered Reynolds 8 for under $30; another (less well centered) closed about 1 minute sooner for about the same price. The only other one that sold in the last 30 days went for more than $180.

RemynSkyler · November 8, 2006 1:54AM

Hello,

I was wondering if anyone could help me out with some advice on these 1971 cards. A guy a work offered to sell me 119 raw 1971 cards. He wants me to make him an offer. I took a look at them and if I were to get them graded they would average out to be a PSA 7. Some would come back 6's and some 8's. There are no major stars in the lot and most are commons, but there are some semi-stars like Catfish Hunter and Willie McCovey. I know this is not much info to go by, but what would be a fair offer? Are there people out there still actively collecting this set because I notice this thread is not getting much play? I would get most of them graded and probably sell them hoping to make a little money. Any imput would be appreciated.

Thanks, Mark

Mefer · November 8, 2006 2:56AM

Mark, are the cards all low series, mid series or high series? Mix? That will help determine what a fair price would be. If you have or can get that information, I can probably throw out my 2 cents.

Official 1971 Topps Baseball Discussion Thread

Comments