Friday, June 22, 2012

The age-old question

One of my favorite aspects of the hobby nowadays is the fact that I can trade with people who live thousands of miles away from me.

If I have a David Ortiz card that I don't need, I can trade it to someone in Florida who might have a Vladimir Guerrero card I want.

Plus, I could never get sick of the familiar sight of a new package of cards in the mailbox, just waiting to be opened.

I know that's true with a lot of other collectors as well.

But perhaps even greater than that is receiving some totally unexpected cards from a fellow hobbyist, as was the case last night.

Although he hasn't blogged much lately, Adam from "Thoughts and Sox" is still alive and well in the blogosphere. He's one of the more frequent readers and commenters on this blog, something I've truly appreciated.

He's already sent me some fantastic cards, and was gracious enough to add a couple more great pieces to my collection this week.

Adam commented on a recent Ron Cey-themed post, saying he might have another card of Cey as an A. (Hey, that rhymes.)

It turns out that the '87 O-Pee-Chee card in question didn't actually picture him in an Oakland uniform. No matter, though, as I had just two cards of "The Penguin" with the hometown Cubs before this one. Plus, my collection is severely lacking in OPC cards, so I'll take any I can get.

I've always loved the little "Now With [Insert Team Here]" designations for some reason.

But this card does bring up one of the more common questions in the hobby.

Do team collectors want "mismatched" cards like these? Cards that picture a player with one team, but list him with another?

I know they can be a bit of an annoyance as far as organization is concerned.

Since my collection is grouped by teams, these can obviously present a problem.

There's hundreds of these types of cards in my collection, although Topps has pretty much stopped the practice in recent years with the advent of "photoshopping".

I decided a long time ago that the card goes into the binder of whatever team the player is pictured with. Some, like Juan Marichal's 1974 Topps Traded issue, have provided more of a challenge. While the card says that Marichal is with the Red Sox, the orange stripes on the uniform make it apparent that he's sporting a Giants uniform in the photo.

So into the Giants binder he goes.

Adam was nice enough to send the above '87 OPC Reggie Jackson card along with the Cey, a fantastic addition to my HOFer collection.

This one gets filed under the Angels section, though. (Although "Mr. October" would have a Traded issue that year with the A's, his final Topps card.)

The way we collect differs from collector to collector, which is part of what makes this hobby great. These types of cards are great examples of that. But I think there's one thing that most of us can agree on.

Free cards are the greatest.

Thanks, Adam!


moremonkeys138 said...

When it comes to team collecting for me, if a player is listed as a Blue Jay on the card, he goes into the box, no matter the uniform. But if he is in a Jays uni and listed as say, a Cub, he's out.

night owl said...

My rule (left on posts like these several times):

If a player is listed as a Dodger or is in a Dodger uniform, he goes in the Dodger collection. My brain is happy with that, it makes sense, it doesn't question it when it sees a player in a Mariner uniform that says "now with Dodgers."

gcrl said...

These team variations as I call them are among the greatest cards ever produced.


hiflew said...

My Rockies collection only recognizes cards labeled as Rockies. If a player is in a Rockies uniform but listed as a Cardinal for example then that is a Cardinals card.

I actually have a little series in mind showcasing this very subject in the near future.

AdamE said...

I go with whatever team is stated on the card. So in my opinion those are both As cards. Like Night Owl I did a post like this long ago. Mine was from some Damon jersey card he sent me.