It's not over yet

Sorry, fellow readers.

I'm going to have to break a promise here.

In my last write-up, I mentioned that my day-after-Christmas post would feature the first part of my holiday "loot".

However, today was a little more hectic than expected, so I didn't have the time or energy to scan any of my X-mas gifts.

But not to worry.

I'll have part one up tomorrow. You can bet on it.

Although I didn't ask for much, I made out like a bandit this Christmas.

It'll be worth the wait.

I promise.

After I finally got home this evening, I found a nice surprise sitting on the living room table.

There sat a couple pre-Christmas trade packages that I'd completely forgotten about. They arrived on the couple days prior to the holiday, but I never got the chance to really sink my teeth into them.

It was certainly a welcome surprise. I always get a little down after Christmas comes and goes.

Those trade packages made me believe that the holidays didn't have to be over just yet.

The first of the "cheerful" pair of mailers came courtesy of Pat from "Hot Corner Cards", one of the newer blogs to join our community.

Some of the first words in the introductory email he sent convinced me that this would be a memorable swap.

"I noticed you need a 1986 Rollie Fingers. I should have it."

A few weeks ago, I lamented at the fact that this seemingly simple "sunset" issue had never found its way into my collection.

It was a thinly-veiled plea, in a way. 

After only a couple days on my "Dime Box Dozen" list, Pat answered the call.

Thanks to him, I finally have a 1986 Topps Rollie Fingers in my collection.

You have no idea how much I've wanted to type those glorious words.

No idea.

Pat was able to hit a few of my 2012 Topps Update needs as well.

Anything after receiving an '86 Rollie Fingers is merely icing on the cake.

When I initially decided to collect Matt Cain, I put "wanted ads" out on both the blogosphere and my trading forum.

I didn't get much from the forums. Maybe three or four new cards.

The blogosphere has been a whole other story.

Back in July, I had about five cards of Cain. I've pulled about four of his issues from packs over these last few months.

With the addition of this one, there are now 56 different Matt Cain cards in my Giants binder.

At least 40 of those have come from the great people of the blogosphere.

Things like that are what separate the forums from the blogs.

For weeks, this was the lone 1987 Update mini on my wantlist.

I'd acquired all the others I needed.

It was down to Gary Carter.

Thankfully, Pat was able to take care of that one as well with this magnificent card of "The Kid". A truly serene shot.

One that showcases Wrigley Field in the backdrop, to boot.

Between an '86 Fingers, gold sparkles, and "The Kid", I'd say that was a pretty spectacular trade.

Thanks, Pat!

Next to Pat's mailer sat another nice stack of cardboard.

And, much like the cards I just showcased, a former "Dime Box Dozen" need hovered atop it.

Earlier last week, Douglas of the terrific new blog "Sportscards From The Dollar Store" contacted me about this very Piazza issue.

He'd recently plucked it from a card show dime box.

Truthfully, I thought this one would sit on my "Dozen" list for a long time. People just don't seem to have a lot of late '90s issues lying around.

However, Douglas was there to take care of that. Even though I don't collect Mr. Piazza, I am extremely ecstatic to have this one in my collection.

It continues the "putting the band back together" theme I've been featuring around here lately. Maybe Piazza can fill on on drums if "The Big Unit" gets sick.

Or maybe we could have a two-drummer situation like The Grateful Dead.

Whatever works.

Plus, seeing as how Douglas is from Canada, I'm extremely happy to have a north-of-the-border dime box find in my household.

It's a first for me.

Although I would've been infinitely happy with just the Piazza, Douglas didn't stop there.

This Lester SP was the last of my 2012 A&G needs, one that was knocked out by a fellow blogger earlier this month.

I thought that was as good as it would get.

With this mini from Douglas, I'll be able to showcase the regular/mini combo in my Red Sox binder, something which is always, always a plus.

It's one of the many perks of my organizational method.

See, this is why I love the blogosphere so much.

As I mentioned before, I basically begged for a copy of Rollie Fingers' 1986 Topps issue in one of my earlier posts.

Two weeks later, both the regular and the O-Pee-Chee cards now sit in my collection.

How awesome is that?

On top of everything, this group of cardboard added a little tidbit to my gluttony of useless baseball knowledge.

Before these cards arrived, I could've told you that "Gene" is actually Tenace's middle name.

His full name is Fury Gene Tenace.

Fury. Look it up.

However, I'd never known that Gene Tenace went on to coach for the Blue Jays after his playing career was over.

Thanks to this Canada-exclusive issue from Douglas, I can wow my friends with that piece of trivia.

And while we're on the topic of Canada...

Here's a hockey card.

No, I didn't request this one from Douglas. I haven't specifically asked for a hockey card in a trade for about seven years.

Still, I'm quite glad that he slipped it in with all the other baseball cardboard.

While baseball does take precedence, I'm simply a fan of any neat sports photography.

And, as you can probably tell, this card is the very definition of "neat photography".

I don't keep up much with hockey these days, so I couldn't tell you who Matt Duchene is.

However, thanks to the back of this card, I can tell you that this shot features his heroic introduction to last year's skills competition.

More specifically, it notes that...

"The player introductions alone were worth the price of admission, providing spectators and players alike with spine-tingling moments even before the NHL's best put their super-human skills on display."

I can see why.

In the email he sent me, Douglas also happened to note that he'd be "more than willing" to send me a few of his dime box finds from the "Expo".

I'd read through most of his posts on the subject and was jealous of quite a few of his steals.

Needless to say, I felt like a kid in a candy store after I read that email.

In the end, I limited myself to two dime cards that absolutely needed to be in my collection.

This was one of them.

Considering the "madness" that surrounds every single A&G release, I'm a little surprised that I'd never seen this card before Douglas posted about it.

I've always felt that these "Highlight Sketches" should get a little more love than they do.

Admittedly, they can be hit-and-miss at times.

But when they hit, they really hit.

I don't consider myself to be a Twins fan by any means. However, the sheer awesomeness of this one made me like the franchise a tiny bit more.

Ah, the power of cardboard.

My eyes lit up when I first saw this beauty on Douglas's blog.

Simply put, I enjoy "milestone" cards.

Not to mention masterpieces like this one.

When Douglas mentioned that he'd be willing to move a few of his Expo "goodies", my thoughts immediately shot to Mr. Brett.

Although about a month had passed since I'd first read about it, I'd always had this one in the back of my mind.

Within days, it was on my doorstep, all thanks to the generosity of a fellow blogger.

See that?

Maybe a little jealousy does pay off in the end.

When it comes to baseball cards, at least.

"The Dime Boxes Top 100": Cards 50-41

Welcome to yet another installment of my "Top 100".

We're at the halfway mark.

There's no turning back now.

We'll be getting into some serious cardboard awesomeness from here on out.

I'd like to take this time to thank all of my readers who have stuck through the first half of these "countdown" posts. 

They've been among my favorites to write over the last couple months, and I'm glad that a few of you out there have enjoyed my take on the 100 greatest "modern" cards of all-time.

I'm already looking forward to creating my vintage "Top 100" in the future.

While I've got you here, I'd also like to note that this will likely be my last post until after Christmas.

For the first time in this blog's history, I'll be going two straight days without blogging.

Gasp!

Hopefully I'll manage.

Because of that, I'd just like to take this opportunity to wish all of you a very merry Christmas!

May your stockings be filled with cardboard goodness.

I'll be back on the 26th to show off all my holiday "loot". Although I have a feeling I'm going to need multiple posts for that.

For now, though, let's take a look at the next ten cards on my "Top 100" list.

#50 -- 1994 Upper Deck Ken Burns Baseball #66 Bill Mazeroski

One of my winter break "resolutions" was to go back and re-watch the entire Ken Burns' Baseball series.

I haven't quite fulfilled that one yet. The ten two-hour installments make for quite the journey.

Despite its gargantuan length, though, I still rate it as the best baseball documentary ever made. It's not really much of a contest in my eyes.

Most baseball fans have at least heard of the series.

However, I'm not quite sure many fans or collectors know that a specially-made set was created to accompany its release.

Fittingly, my parents got me the complete 80-card box set as a Christmas gift back when I was still in my pre-teen years.

While there are certainly a slew of terrific pieces within the set, I'd have to rank this one of "Maz" as my absolute favorite.

I have dozens of cards commemorating Mazeroski's World Series-winning homer in 1960, but none of them are nearly as striking as this one.

These black-and-white landscape shots are simply staggering. 

The giant scoreboard lurking in the background really ties this one together. The clock even allows the collector to see the exact time at which the homer was hit.

This is baseball, in every sense of the word.

#49 -- 1999 Ultimate Victory #133 Jim Morris SP RC

I still rate this as one of my all-time greatest dime box finds.

Although the scan may leave something to be desired, there's a lot to love about it.

First of all, short-printed rookies aren't all that common when it comes to dime boxes. This is one of just a handful I've found in my collecting career.

However, the real reason this card made the "Top 100" is because it features the subject of one of the most inspirational stories in baseball history.

It's all chronicled in "The Rookie", one of my personal favorite baseball movies.

After battling arm injuries during his 1980's minor league days, 35 year-old Jim Morris came out of nowhere to make his big league debut with the Devil Rays in 1999. (I went more in-depth with the story in this post.)

That certainly makes for one of the strangest rookie cards ever produced.

And, if you haven't yet seen the film, go and rent it immediately.

It'll probably give you a better understanding of why this card ranked so high in my "Top 100".

Plus, it's a darn good piece of cinema.

#48 -- 1999 Upper Deck #409 Jim Abbott

Jim Abbott was basically the reason I created the "two-card rule" for my countdown.

Without it, he'd probably own at least five or six of the hundred total slots. 

I needed to keep it fair.

It was tough to settle on my two favorite Abbott cards. The first was never in doubt, as it's one you'll see once we get into the deeper reaches of these posts.

In the end, though, I gave this one the second slot. 

Keen-eyed collectors might be wondering why I picked this one over his 1991 Upper Deck issue, one that features an ever-rare shot of a post-DH/pre-interleague AL "pitcher at the plate".

It's a valid point.

I'm not big on UD's 1999 design. And, although still neat, a National League "pitcher at the plate" isn't all that uncommon in this hobby.

However, this is one of those cards that I can trace back to my childhood. As you can tell from some of its edge and corner wear, I've had this one in my collection for a long, long time.

As I was just starting to get into baseball, I remember thinking how cool it was that a guy with one hand actually got to hit in the bigs. 

Because I've always been kind of a "stat geek", I looked further into it. Much to my surprise, I found that Abbott actually collected two hits during his '99 season with the Brewers.

That is and always will be awesome.

Not unlike this card.

#47 -- 1988 Conlon Collection #9 Daffy/Dizzy Dean

Interestingly, this card is listed in my "big book o' cards" as simply a "Daffy" Dean issue.

But I know better.

No matter what my book might say, this is one of the greatest "combo" cards in history, featuring my all-time favorite baseball brother duo.

Amazingly, "Dizzy" and "Daffy" dean won a combined 49 games in 1934, the prime year of the famous Cards' "Gashouse Gang". 

Some cards need to be "flashy" or have some kind of cool characteristic to crack this list.

Not this one.

The mere appearance of the Dean brothers is enough for me.

#46 -- 1987 Classic Yellow #124 Andre Dawson

I've featured this one on my blog a few times before.

Although it's only been in my collection for a few months, there was never a doubt in my mind that it'd find its way into the "Top 100".

The fact that it was my favorite find from the self-proclaimed "best dime box ever" should tell you something.

In my years of collecting, I have never seen another card of a guy getting beaned.

I doubt I ever will.

Even now, I just can't get over the fact that a photographer managed to capture the exact moment this ill-fated baseball met Andre Dawson's face.

It's just not something you see every day.

#45 -- 1997 Pinnacle Denny's #29 Jackie Robinson

This was certainly one of the more "obscure" cards to make my countdown.

Denny's or not, the action-filled "play at the plate" makes it one of my personal favorite Dodger cards in existence. Although I'm probably not one to speak for the greatest Dodger cards ever made.

Someone's already doing that one, a list which was the inspiration for this very countdown.

Even with all the great three-dimensional cards out there, this proved to be the only 3-D issue to crack the "Top 100".

But, still...a card from Denny's? In the "Top 100"?

Believe it.

#44 -- 2007 UD Masterpieces #5 Carlton Fisk

Like the famous Mazeroski homer, I have plenty of cards that showcase Carlton Fisk's immortal dinger from the '76 World Series.

And every single one is an absolute masterpiece.

Appropriately, though, I feel that UD's Masterpieces issue did the greatest job of depicting the finish of arguably the greatest game in baseball history. 

Even though not being able to see a player's face on a card is usually a deal-breaker for me, I'll always make a special exception for this one.

It captured this elegant "moment in time" in all its glory.

#43 -- 2010 Topps #409b Richie Ashburn SP

As I've mentioned before, my MLB Showdown ties make this a special favorite of mine. 

No matter how you slice it, though, this is one of the better faux-action shots I've ever seen on a piece of cardboard. 

The vivid colors on it are second to none.

One of my bigger regrets as a collector is the fact that I haven't been able to track down more of these "legend" short-prints.

The Ashburn is one of just three or four in my collection as we speak. 

I'll certainly be on the hunt for more of them at future shows. 

Until then, though, Mr. Ashburn will certainly tide me over.

I could never, ever get sick of this one.

#42 -- 2001 Upper Deck Legends #42 Babe Ruth

I swear, I didn't plan for a card number 42 to occupy the 42nd slot in this countdown.

Just a happy accident, I guess.

"The Babe" certainly deserves better these days. Even with the gluttony of the base and inserts we've seen of his lately, most of them feature overused and heavily recycled shots of the "Sultan of Swat".

That lack of effort makes this one stand out all the more in my Yankee binder.

Ruth was a true "hero" to baseball. Without him, there's a good chance we'd be watching an entirely different version of the game these days.

I'm not sure that any card does a better job of capturing that "heroic" sense than this one. 

I mean, the guy's wearing a gigantic crown that literally has his name on it. 

What more do you need?

#41 -- 1992 Topps #40 Cal Ripken Jr.

Tonight's "Top 100" installment closes out with one of the unquestioned "gems" of the overproduction era.

Not surprisingly, I featured it in the theme devoted to that very subject long ago.

Even though I only caught the tail end of his career, Ripken was one of my favorite players to watch as a kid. 

He was a true "professional" in every sense of the term, something that came through in the way he played the game.

Not to mention that he was arguably the most consistent player baseball has ever seen.

Although he would eventually eclipse the hallowed mark, Ripken was still a few years away from breaking Lou Gehrig's consecutive games played record when this card was released.

I guess he wasn't the superstitious type.

The method to my madness

I've received quite a few nice emails during my tenure as a blogger.

Often time, they come in the form of trade proposals from readers or fellow members of the blogosphere.

Those always manage to put a smile on my face, as I'm not usually one to turn down a swap. Especially given how easy they are to complete around here.

The long, dragged out trading forum tactics are a thing of the past.

On occasion, I'll get an email from a reader saying how much they enjoy my writings.

Anyone who runs one of the many blogs in the blogosphere knows how awesome it is to get a compliment from a fellow collector.

They're a major part of what keeps me chugging along with this blogging thing on a daily basis.

Lately, though, I've been getting more and more emails from readers who have questions about me, my blog, or my collection.

To borrow the title of one of those recent emails I received, it's almost like my "fan mail", in a way.

While the amount of different questions I've fielded over the past year have been quite diverse, one seems to keep popping up on a regular basis.

Usually, it's something along the lines of...

"How do you organize your collection?"

This is something I actually discussed in the very first post on this blog.

I never tire of hearing how others store their respective collections. The organizational process is one of the best parts of being a collector.

At that same time, I never tire of talking about how I go about storing my cards.

I've been using this method for a few years now, and I couldn't be happier with it. Although the cards I post on this blog may seem quite random at times, I can assure you that I am not one of those Hoarders people.

My sorting method is pretty much to thank for that.

Trouble is, I have a hard time explaining the "process" with just words.

It'd be easier for me to simply show you.

So that's exactly what I'm going to do with this post.

But, for anyone with more questions, please keep 'em coming. I always enjoy answering my so-called "fan mail".

To start, I have self-labeled my organizational process as the "tiered" method.

You'll see why in a bit.

As I've mentioned many times before, I am a proud "binder guy". Nearly every single "keeper" card I own is stored in a trusty nine-pocket page within one of my 55 different binders.

One of those fifty-five binders contains my Hoyt Wilhelm collection, my printing plates, my autos, and my jersey cards. The autos/jerseys I own are separated between current and retired players.

I don't add to that one a whole lot anymore.

Another one of those contains my "defunct" cards, made up of all my Browns, Colt .45s, Pilots, and Senators cards. (The Expos get their own binder.)

Beginning with the Angels and ending with the Yankees, each of my other 53 binders are team-exclusive. Some of them are even divided into multiple sections.

Because they make up the very first binders on my bookshelf, I'll be focusing on my Angels cards to supplement my pointers here.

Over the years, I've had to split up my Halos issues into three different binders due to the sheer volume of cardboard. (Quick note: Try not to overfill your binders, kids.)

My third Angels binder has one of those cool, little "pockets" on the outside for easier identification. I use this extra Reggie Jackson card to ID my final grouping of Angels cards.

Sure, sorting by team isn't all that uncommon amongst collectors.

But here's where the process starts to get a bit tricky...

Within each team binder, I sort by the position of each player.

Depending on the league of the team, I have eight or nine different sections for each franchise.

In order, they go as such: Pitcher, catcher, first base, second base, shortstop, third base, outfield, DH, and any miscellaneous team cards.

Obviously, my NL cards don't have a "DH" section. 

Also, I don't sort by left, center, and right field. I tried that when I first started this method, but it got waaaay too messy and complicated.

Because of that, all outfielders are grouped together.

After the respective positions, I sort by player.

More specifically, I sort by the number of cards I own of each player.

The guys you see above all "lead" their respective positions. I own more cards of Jered Weaver than any other Angels pitcher, more of Mike Napoli of any other Angels catcher...and so on. 

My team cards are pretty much all over the place. They're not really sorted in any way. Thankfully, my "O.C.D." hasn't come into play with those...yet.

Chone Figgins represents a bit of a roadblock that can come with an organizational method such as this one.

Throughout his career, Figgins has been quite a versatile commodity. He shined at many different positions during his Angels days.

As a result, a nice chunk of my earlier cards of his list him as a second baseman. A few others picture him as an outfielder.

In situations like these, the majority rules. 

More of my Figgins cards list him at third base than any other position, so under the third base section he goes. It'd just be too much of a headache to grant him respective spots for his second base/outfield cards. 

Note: The only exception comes with Rick Ankiel in my Cardinals binder. Because of the uncommon pitcher/outfield split, he gets two different sections.

For a better understanding, let's take a deeper look into the pitchers' section of my Angels binder.

As I mentioned before, I own more cards of Jered Weaver than any other Angels pitcher.

My 101 different Angels issues of his kick off the binder.

Within each player section, my cards aren't all that organized. The only exception are the variant-type issues, as you can see with the Upper Deck/UD First Edition issues in the bottom two slots.

Those awesome "variations" are what keep my love for binders going each day.

After Weaver, it moves onto my 75 different Francisco Rodriguez Angels cards. After that, we have my 69 different Angels issues of Jim Abbott.

And then my 40 Nolan Ryans...

All the way down to the "single-digits".

Here, you see one of my three cards of Lou Burdette as an Angel. (The other two are located on the flip side of this page.)

Then, we have my three Luis Tiant Angels issues, one of the best subjects of my "unfamiliar uniform" collection.

After that, we have my two different Angels cards of Jason Isringhausen and Kevin Gregg.

And, finally, there's Zack Greinke, the lone "one-card wonder" of Angel pitchers.

His 2012 Topps Update card is the only one of his in my Angel binder to date.

From there, it moves on to the next position.

That's pretty much it.

So...did that make sense?

It can be a bit complex sometimes, I'll admit.

But, then again, that's what I love about it. I doubt there's another card collection in the world stored like mine.

To any of you contemplating on how to organize your cards, I can only offer one piece of advice.

Make it something that you'll enjoy.

In the end, that's all that matters.

Generation gap

I've been collecting for about a dozen years now.

Although I couldn't tell you exactly when my obsession with cardboard first started, it was likely around the ages of seven or eight.

Needless to say, It's been a wild ride.

I've seen a lot during my time in this hobby. 

I was there when heaps of serial numbered parallels began flooding the market. I was there to witness hundreds and hundreds of different sets come and go.

And, of course, I was there to see the ascent of the almighty "jersey card".

On the whole, though, I'm fairly happy to have grown up in the era I did. 

While I may express my dissatisfaction with the whole "jersey card" or "book value" craze from time to time, I'm still proud to be a so-called "child of the '90s".

Still, I can't help but wonder one thing.

Was it the best era for baseball cards?

It's hard to answer a question like that with any kind of objectivity.

I'm sure collectors who grew up during the '70s or '80s would say that their era was the absolute greatest. 

The few collectors around my age would probably be swayed towards the current generation of cardboard.

It's a question I've thought about many times before, and one I've always wanted to answer.

And while I don't consider myself to be an "expert" on this hobby by any means, I thought I'd take a closer look into what exactly the word "best" might entail.

As I've mentioned before on this blog, my dad has told me about his childhood collecting days on many occasions. 

He was there to see the first appearances of "rookies" like Brett and Fidrych on baseball cards. And he was there to see Roberto Clemente and "Hammerin' Hank" say their final cardboard goodbyes.

Best of all, he got to see it all through the packs he bought at the local corner store.

I've never much liked the fact that almost all of my pack-busting experiences have come courtesy of a big-box store like Target. It just doesn't have a very "personal" feel to it.

Between the disinterested cashiers and the aisles of boredom, I never really feel "at home" when I'm in one of those types of places.

Maybe I'm glorifying it a bit, but I can't imagine how awesome it must've been to walk down to the local corner store and plop down a quarter for a pack of baseball cards. A pack that could've contained the likes of Manny Sanguillen or Carl Yastrzemski.

And not to mention that brittle, tasteless, glorious piece of bubble gum.

Times change, though.

The local corner store that my dad used to get his cardboard from is now an OfficeMax.

I guess that's typical in a lot of ways.

Then again, I don't know how long I could've sustained my collection with just a corner store.

Growing up with the Internet has certainly helped keep my interest in cardboard.

Without it, my present-day self probably wouldn't care about baseball cards. Much less one that features a relatively obscure player like Endy Chavez.

Even in today's age, I still had a few friends who collected when I was growing up. We'd revel in each other's new "finds" on a daily basis.

Over time, though, those friends stopped collecting. Eventually, I lost touch with them all together.

For that reason, I credit technology for helping me stick with this hobby through middle and high school.

Without any friends who collected, I myself probably would've eventually lost interest in baseball cards as well.

However, the Internet opened me up to a whole other world of people who shared the same feelings I did about cardboard. Even though a lot of them were thousands of miles away, it didn't matter.

I was just happy to be part of the "club".

Although I haven't had a whole lot of great things to say about forums during my time as a blogger, I will say this.

I'm not sure if I'd still be collecting today without them.

On top of that, virtually any baseball card I could ever want is at my fingertips these days.

Even if I had somehow stuck with collecting without trading forums and the like, my collection would be a far, far cry from what it is today.

Through the Internet, I have managed to add thousands and thousands of awesome new pieces to my binders, pieces that I probably never would've acquired otherwise.

It could be a simple PWE trade on the forums. Or a monumental swap with a fellow blogger. Or even a Listia auction. (Especially one that allows me to add such a tremendous Johnny Evers card to my collection for a mere 100 credits.)

Every single one has helped my collection in some way, shape, or form.

And none of them would've been possible thirty years ago.

Still, I can't help but wonder how simple collecting would've been had I grown up in the '60s or '70s.

Of course, I understand that the rest of the world was far from "simple" during that time period. Between Woodstock, a faltering economy, and the Vietnam War, the times were a changin'.

But, through it all, baseball cards pretty much stayed the same.

Although smaller, more obscure sets were being released, basically all the collector had at the time was reliable ol' Topps.

No hint of an uber-short printed base card that I'd never acquire. No "scammers" to be found. And no obnoxious amounts of parallels made for the sole purpose of netting a quick buck.

The concept of the baseball card seemed to mean more back then.

I'm sure thousands of Tiger fans were ecstatic to pull Al Kaline's card in 1967. The fact that it was his only card of the year made it even more cherished among hoards of young collectors.

The fact that I own over 600 cards of Vlad Guerrero is certainly a testament to his "Dime Box MVP" status.

At the same time, though, 600 cards sure is a lot once you stop and think about it. And a lot of them are from one-and-done sets that barely made a blip on the hobby's radar.

As a player collector, it's basically my "job" to chase down as many Vlad cards as possible.

But does any collector really need six hundred cards of a single player?

Probably not.

I guess a little variety never hurts, though.

As much as he loved collecting, my dad says that he used to get more and more doubles with each passing pack as a kid. And he couldn't just go and pick up a pack of a different set because...well, Topps was the only game in town.

After the demise of "high-numbers" in 1973, Topps released all their cards in one series. And there they'd sit for the rest of the year.

If Flagship was the only thing on the shelves these days, I'd probably get bored with it by July or so.

Admittedly, I sometimes take the variety of this hobby for granted. There's a new set on the shelves every couple months.

Once I get most of the Flagship cards I need, it's on to Heritage. And then A&G. And then Update.

New sets like Triple Play even pop up every once in a while, much to my pleasure.

Kids of the '70s didn't really have that.

Although the current "Topps Monopoly" has limited it a bit, I still have quite a few ways to spend my dollar.

And I couldn't be happier.

So, now for the million-dollar question.

Although both generations certainly had their ups and downs, which era of collecting really was better?

The "simpleness" of the past or the "variety" we have now?

Truthfully, I couldn't tell you.

It's not for me to decide.

You'll have to figure that one out for yourself.

I doubt I'll ever really know the answer.

If there even is one.

Words, words, words

Honestly, I don't feel too much like writing about baseball cards today.

It's just one of those times where I can't seem to find inspiration to write about anything related to cardboard. It should pass by tomorrow.

Instead, I thought I'd write about...well, writing.

As I've mentioned many times in the past, starting this blog was one of the best decisions I ever made. It's allowed me to gain an entirely new perspective on this hobby. Plus, it's allowed me to meet a great bunch of collectors in the process.

But the magic of the blogosphere doesn't end with simply cardboard.

Nope, I've found that it has affected my non-collector self as well.

Even though I can't bring myself to compose a decent post about baseball cards tonight, I still feel the need to write something.

Why?

Because I've found that I legitimately enjoy to write. 

Whether it involves baseball cards or not, there is something special about putting my thoughts about a given topic on a piece of paper, whether real or virtual. (In the case of blogging, virtual.)

I'm free to express my thoughts about my copy of Thurman Munson's 1975 Topps issue in any way I choose. 

It's a former quarter box find of mine. The purple-pink border combo is something we haven't seen the likes of since. 

And it's one of my all-time favorite Yankee cards.

Trouble is, I've never gotten the chance to write about baseball cards for school or anything. 

Because of that, I'd merely viewed writing as just another grade towards my GPA in the past. It was something I didn't mind doing, but nothing I'd ever prefer to do.

That all changed with the advent of this blog.

I simply cannot stop myself from writing. It's something I need to do on a daily basis. 

And, when I'm assigned to write for a school project or something, I see it as more than just a simple "grade". 

It's a chance to express myself to my heart's content.

One of my final projects at school this year was an eight-page minimum paper for my film class. 

I surpassed the eight-page mark within an hour or two. I actually had to stop myself from writing a couple times.

Although it could've actually been a bit longer, I handed in a 20-page paper to my teacher on the day it was due. 

And I got an "A" on it.

If you read some of the earlier posts on here, you might notice that I wasn't the most refined wordsmith in the world. Some of the writing is just awful.

When I read over those posts nowadays, I still have a hard time believing that I was the one who actually wrote that stuff.

And even though I don't currently consider myself a great writer or anything, I feel that this blog has at least allowed me to become an enormously better wordsmith over the past year.

I'm not afraid to admit it, either.

I love writing.

So much so, in fact, that I'm strongly considering minoring in journalism when I finally move onto a four-year college next year.

When I started this blog, all I wanted to do was babble about some of my favorite baseball cards.

Never did I think it would have this much of an impact on my everyday life.

Never in a million years.

The quirks of collecting

Card collectors can be a weird bunch sometimes.

Actually, let me rephrase that.

Card collectors can be a weird bunch a lot of the time.

Now, I'm not talking "weird" in the hoarder-like sense of the term. A lot of non-collectors seem to think that anyone who collects cards has random stuff scattered across their houses.

I'm here to tell you, non-hobbyists, that you probably won't see a card collector wind up on that Hoarders show anytime soon.

We're actually a pretty finicky bunch.

Sometimes too much so.

If anything, we're "weird" because we pay too much attention to detail in organizing our collection, often going to painstaking lengths to make everything just right.

If that's being "weird", then count me in.

Like ninety-nine percent of other collectors out there, I suffer from some form of "O.C.D." involving my cards. I've recounted my little quirks in the past on this blog.

Over the past few months, though, I've been trying to give myself some cardboard "therapy". Sometimes, I just like to go through my binders and try to determine which of those "quirks" need to be extinguished.

And I think I might actually be getting better, which is saying something given how complacent I can be with my collection at times.

Take that Mickey Rivers card, for instance.

Definitely one of the nicer pieces of my Yankees collection. The stirrup socks and loud colors of the fans in the backdrop just scream "1970's baseball".

Yet, for a while, I was thinking about removing it from my Yankees binder altogether.

Why?

The tiny photo on the back features him in a Rangers helmet.

A couple years ago, I would've immediately placed this one with the rest of my miscellaneous cards. A card had to be 100 percent Yankee to go into the Yankee binder.

Upon closer examination, I decided that this was a "quirk" I could really do without.

If this one goes into the miscellaneous binder, than almost every single early Stadium Club card I own should suffer the same fate. After all, the awesome rookie card "flashbacks" on the backs of those often showcase the player with a different team.

By my law, then, all of those should be removed from their respective binders.

And that just wasn't going to happen.

Besides, with my front-and-back page storage tactic, the backs of most of my cards aren't even visible.

So the Rivers stayed in the Yankees binder.

The therapy worked.

I've heard a few "binder" people voice their concerns over this next one.

As cool as minis are, they don't look all that nifty in standard nine-pocket pages. Plus, due to the large amount of free space, they can fall out of a page fairly easily.

Yet, since I don't own any of those specially-made mini pages, I've been forced to store my bite-sized cards with all the normal pieces of cardboard.

I used to hate it.

It just didn't look right.

Recently, though, I've come to see minis in a slightly different light.

As far as my binders go, they serve as a nice change of pace.

While regular-sized cards may look nicer in pages, the minis do a nice job of showcasing the "little of everything" that makes up my collection.

Plus, they really do stand out. This Jon Garland A&G mini is placed in the center of its respective page for a reason.

I'd say ninety-nine of every hundred cards I own are your standard, regular-sized pieces.

In collecting, though, minis are the one percent.

From time to time nowadays, I choose to "induct" a new player into my binders.

That never used to happen. For a long time, I wasn't much open to adjusting my collecting system.

Thankfully, the blogosphere has done a lot of the work in this round of "therapy" sessions.

A lot of you have been very accommodating with all the new "inductees" I've featured on this blog.

This post has proven to be a resounding success as far as that goes. Fellow bloggers have helped me close in on the thirty-card mark for my McCutchen and Stanton collections.

I've already topped the fifty-card plateau with "Mr. Perfect" himself, Matt Cain.

Due to all the great help I've received with my other "inductees" thus far, I decided to grant another player his very own spot in my binders.

Mr. Josh Reddick.

He's already proven himself to be an up-and-coming player in Oakland. While I certainly appreciate that, it's not the real reason I decided to make him a part of my collection.

The fact that we share a birthday is responsible for that.

Just like me, Reddick was born on February 19th, although he's five years older than I am.

Longtime pitcher Miguel Bautista is the only other fellow "birthday boy" currently in my binders.

Reddick will certainly make for an outstanding new addition.

At this point, though, the above Gypsy Queen issue is my only card of his.

On that note, I have a message for any future traders of mine.

Send me your Josh Reddick cards!

I think it's safe to say that my "therapy" sessions have certainly been working.

As far as my organizational methods go, anyways.

Unfortunately, I think my little "quirks" have begun to shift in a totally different direction lately. To an entirely different aspect of my card-collecting life.

Scanning.

A lot of my earlier posts have awful scanning jobs. It doesn't take an expert to see that. To be fair, I was just learning how to use my scanner at that point.

Over the past year, though, it has risen to near-O.C.D. levels.

Every card I show on this blog has to be perfectly straight and nicely cropped.

Since I'm able to do that manually after every scan, single cards don't provide much of a problem. It takes fifteen seconds per card, thirty at the most.

White-bordered cards can prove to be a bit of a problem at times, since my scanner often doesn't pick up the plain backdrops.

I nailed it on the first try with this Ausmus, but other attempts of mine haven't been as peachy.

Often times, I'll have to put a colored piece of paper behind a white-bordered card in order for my scanner to not mutilate it.

Is that a quirk?

Perhaps.

But it's nothing compared to this next phenomena.

It's gotten to the point where I don't even like to scan two cards side-by-side anymore.

If I do so, they must be perfectly straight, perfectly aligned, and perfectly cropped.

I'm not sure if all bloggers go through this with their scanning habits. This rather extreme "quirk" of mine has only started to develop in the past few months.

As you might imagine, it has become quite the time-consumer. Even if it's just a little bit off, I have to redo the entire process.

The beautiful McCovey duo you see above successfully scanned on take three.

That's pretty much on the lower end of the spectrum. It's taken me ten or so tries to get a few pairs of cards to be in line with one another.

Crazy, I know.

It's like I said earlier, though.

Collectors can be an odd bunch sometimes.

I'm no exception.

Dime Box Heroes: Mix 'n match

2002 Ultra #94 Mike Liebrathal

If I got paid to look through dime boxes, I'd probably be rich by now.

As many fellow dime box nuts know, a nice and thorough "dig" can be quite the time-consumer. I've spent a full hour at quite a few card show tables in my past travels.

Plus, I've learned that once I start searching through a dime box, it's almost impossible for me to stop. As soon as I commit to one, I'm pretty much hopeless. You'll never be able to drag me away.

Although you can try.

Because of this, quite a few factors go into deciding if a given dime box is really worth the time and effort.

The first question I ask myself is...

Am I going to find anything I really need here?

I once saw a gigantic table of at least a dozen different dime boxes at a show. I'm sure you can imagine how excited I was about that.

However, a couple quick peeks inside revealed nothing but newer rookie cards, something I've never had much interest in acquiring. While I probably could've found a few pieces I needed, I knew that it probably wasn't going to be worth it in the end.

So I moved on.

That kind of goes hand-in-hand with my next little tip.

Do I have time to look through all these cards?

I don't usually set a standard time limit for my dime box digs. If I do, they're often fairly lax.

Still, if I see that a show is filled to the brim with wonderful dime cards, I have to plan accordingly. I might not devote a whole lot of time to a box full of newer issues when I see a "little of everything" dime box looming in the next aisle.

So, while it might be hard for me to do so, I sometimes have to cut my dime box quests a little short in order to get the most out of my card show experience.

Thanks to the show I attended this past Saturday, I've been thinking about modifying my last dime box tip.

Is this a baseball-exlusive dime box?

Although I'm a steadfast baseball dime box kind of guy, I'm sure there are football, basketball, and hockey dime box lovers out there as well.

However, from what I've seen, very few collectors are interested in more than one or two different sports.

Some people don't even take the time to sort their dime boxes, just throwing cards of all different types together without much of a thought.

Honestly, I really don't think it's too much to ask for a vendor o separate their cards properly. It makes things quite a bit easier for the customer, something that is likely to attract more business.

In the end, I usually skip those types of boxes. It can be a bit of a pain to dig through stacks of football and basketball cards in search of those few baseball ones.

However, with the array of terrific finds I landed out of a "mixed" dime box a few days ago, I just may have to make these a part of my dime box repertoire. 

Although the "dig" consisted of only a single 3200-count box, I found more than 80 new additions to my collection, despite the fact that I had to sift through countless amounts of football and basketball cards in the process.

I didn't even show this awesome "post-play at the plate" Liebrathal in my "official" show report. 

That's how great it was.

In the future, it might not be a bad idea to at least give these "mix 'n match" boxes a look.

They certainly hold their share of diamonds in the rough.