Skip to main content

Do wop diddy wop diddy wop doo


Last weekend I was at a card show. I picked up enough Dodgers from the 2014 Topps Heritage set that I almost have a complete team set.

Unfortunately, I fell a few cards short and there are still a couple that I need.

But those are just modern card problems. This weekend's achievement blows last weekend's achievement away.

2014 Heritage, after all, is merely mimicking 1965 Topps.

And just the other day, Dave K. sent me Johnny Podres here.

It was the last card I needed to finish off the team set from '65 Topps.

Look:


I suppose some would say the ERA Leaders card doesn't belong with the team set, but I and a number of others think it does. And since that's the case, I still need the strikeout leaders card from that set, in which Drysdale is in the bottom right corner of the card.

But basically I'm finished with the team set from '65.

This is terrific for so many reasons:

1. '65 is one of the best sets of the '60s
2. Heritage is paying tribute to the '65 set this year
3. '65 is the year Sandy Koufax ruled the earth
4. '65 is the year the Dodgers won the World Series
5. '65 is the year I was born

The card world is in harmony today.

 I remember the first two Dodger cards from this set that I ever had. They were Frank Howard and Ron Perranoski. I still have those originals, obtained during the first time that I knew I could obtain vintage cards (I don't remember how I obtained them, but I know it was during my early high school years).

From the 1960s, this completes the 1965, 1967, 1968 and 1969 Dodgers Topps team sets for me. I have a lot more hard work to go.

But today I am celebrating.



(P.S.: If you know the title reference, you know why it applies, you're as old as I am, and your taste in music may be as questionable as mine).

Comments

Mark Hoyle said…
Very nice. I agree with you all the leader cards should be included.
It's odd that 3B-SS John Kennedy is the only third baseman with a card. I would have thought that Jim Gilliam (or maybe even Ken McMullen) would be represented.
I'm on the other side. If the pennant doesn't say "Dodgers", it's not a Dodgers card. To me, it's a "misc" card, like checklists, leaders, or late-series multi-team rookie stars cards (although I have been known to put those multi-team rookie cards in my Phillies binder if they contain a Phillie. I guess my reasoning is that there is so few of them, it's not really a subset unto itself, like the leaders, all-star, world series, or checklist cards.)

All my non-Phillies are in binders per year, and within a binder are grouped by team (yes, I know most everyone else arranges then numerically). All the "non-team" cards I described above are in the front, with each type having their own page(s).
...because if you're collecting the whole set, and a leaders card has Dave McNally AND Jim Kaat on it, is it an Orioles card or a Twins card? Do you have duplicates, and put one with each team? I solve all these pressing questions bu putting them together in the front of the binder as "common" cards.
Mark Hoyle said…
I too separate by team not number. As a Sox collector and set collector I would search out two leader cards. Many of my old 60's and 70's sets are still set up in the old four division lineup. Old habits are hard to break. For my 68 and 69 redsox sets I went as far as collecting all the allstar cards that had Yaz on the back as a puzzle. Also included is all the insert and test issues Topps put out.
Mark Hoyle said…
Also in some of my Sox sets I would search out cards from other teams that had guys who ended up on the sox. Much like you display on your 67 topps blog. I only do that on pennant winning years.
Dave said…
I never noticed there wasn't a Junior in 1965 Topps until now. He played in over 100 games in 1964 and 1965; you would think he'd get a card.
JediJeff said…
Ok - you got me this time, N.O. That scan looks mighty fine. Congrats.
jacobmrley said…
Point of order: I would say that since both players on the League Leader card, in this case the ERA leader, is on said team, than it should be thought of as part of the teams set. The same would go for any Superstar Combo card or multi-player rookie prospect card. Since here, the Strikeout leader has players of many teams, then they are not vital to the team set, but could/should be for the psychotic completest.
Cool Breeze said…
Song is "65 love affair" by Paul Davis (I think on the singer)
Anonymous said…
My equivalent song would be released in 2003, called "87 love affair" and thus I'd honor the Topps wood borders. Not sure who'd sing it. Maybe Kid Rock. He was starting into his country-ish ways by then.
Anonymous said…
(Joe Shlabotnik sits down to eat his breakfast and catch up on posts...)
Doo-wop-diddy-wop-diddy-wop-doo...? Sounds kind of familiar, but...
(Looks at comments)
'65 Love Affair? I should know that, but I'm still not placing it...
(Goes to YouTube for the video)
Oh, yeah, that song. Meh.
(Stops the video and goes to take a shower)
Doo-wop-diddy-wop-diddy-wop-doo...
(Brushing teeth)
Doo-wop-diddy-wop-diddy-wop-doo...
(Getting dressed)
'65 love affair, we weren't gettin' nowhere but we didn't care...
Arrrrgh!!! Can't... Get... This... Song... Out... Of... My... Head!!!!!
(shakes fist towards the heaven and screams)
DAMN YOU, NIGHT OWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWL!!!!!!!

Awesome cards, by the way.
Doo-wop-diddy-wop-diddy-wop-doo
Doo-wop-diddy-wop-diddy-wop-doo...
Fuji said…
When I built my 1972 Topps A's set, I included any card featuring an Athletic, because it felt incomplete without them. But I'm just one collector... with one preference. I understand that everyone has their own collecting style.
hiflew said…
I agree that leaders belong with the team set, although I disagree with one thing. 1962 is the best set of the 60s, although 1965 is a close second.
arpsmith said…
Congrats, I agree that 65 is the best set of the 60s followed by 62 in my opinion. I collect all the Leaders cards in my Giants team sets, since the player and the team are noted it just seems right to me. I didn't know the Dodgers had a quad player Rookies card, that design looks pretty cool.
night owl said…
If it's any consolation, I hated this song when it came out. It's still not my favorite ... but, yeah, very catchy.
Commishbob said…
Leader cards are part of a team set as far as I'm concerned. My Orioles team sets contain every card that has a player ID'd as an Oriole, leaders, mixed team/multi-player rookie cards, etc.

random things.....Topps chose a good color scheme for the Dodgers in '65. The yellow/gold/tan goes nicely with the blue.... the Koufax is a neat card, I need to upgrade mine some day, it's kinda rough..... the red background on the team card looks wrong in that grouping. I'd of used blue.... it would have been cool if Sweet Lou Johnson had gotten a card, he was a key player in '65, but I understand why he wasn't in the set coming off a couple of years in the minors.
Yes, if you're collecting just a team set, I would agree with that. But if you're collecting the complete set for the year, it doesn't make sense (to me) to split up the leaders cards among the various teams, especially since almost all of the cards would have players from multiple teams.

Above, I mentioned that I keep my Phillies in their own binder, and in that binder also include late-series rookie start cards that have Phillies and other teams' players on them (like the '68 Larry Hisle or '69 Terry Harmon). So, for those rare instances, I'm going against my own above-stated position on "non-team-specific" cards. But I don't do that with the leaders cards, I guess since they come in a set of 12, so I keep them all together, whereas the multi-team rookie cards are few and far between from 1964-1972.
Mark, what I also do (which sounds like you do also) is that for my Phillies binders only, I also include players with a card in that set labelled for their previous team if they played for the Phillies IN THAT SEASON. For example, in my 1967 Phillies section, I also have Turk Farrell (Astros), Gene Oliver (Braves), and Chuck Hiller (Mets) (but not the '67 Woodie Fryman card, since he didn't play for the Philllies until 1968).

Then, over in my 1967 binder, in (for example) the Astros section, I either have a duplicate Turk Farrell card, or a 2"x3" piece of paper with the player's name and a note that his card is in the Phillies binder.

Anal? I prefer "organized".
Commishbob said…
I'm with you on the set collector concept, Jim. All leader cards would be part of the overall set. I guess I should have been clearer.

Popular posts from this blog

This guy was everywhere

It's interesting how athletes from the past are remembered and whether they remain in the public conscious or not.

Hall of Fame players usually survive in baseball conversations long after they've played because they've been immortalized in Cooperstown. Then there are players who didn't reach the Hall but were still very good and somehow, some way, are still remembered.

Players like Dick Allen, Rusty Staub, Vida Blue and Mickey Rivers live on decades later as younger generations pick up on their legacies. Then there are all-stars like Bert Campaneris, who almost never get discussed anymore.

There is just one memory of Campaneris that younger fans most assuredly know. I don't even need to mention it. You know what's coming, even if Lerrin LaGrow didn't.

But there was much more to Campaneris than one momentary loss of reason.

A couple of months ago, when watching old baseball games on youtube hadn't gotten old yet, I was watching a World Series game from…

Some of you have wandered into a giveaway

Thanks to all who voted in the comments for their favorite 1970s Topps card of Bert Campaneris.

I didn't know how this little project would go, since I wasn't installing a poll and, let's face it, the whole theme of the post is how Campaneris these days doesn't get the respect he once did. (Also, I was stunned by the amount of folks who never heard about the bat-throwing moment. Where am I hanging out that I see that mentioned at least every other month?)

A surprising 31 people voted for their favorite Campy and the one with the most votes was the one I saw first, the '75 Topps Campy card above.

The voting totals:

'75 Campy - 11 votes
'70 Campy - 4
'72 Campy - 4
'73 Campy - 4
'76 Campy - 4
'74 Campy - 3
'78 Campy - 1

My thanks to the readers who indulged me with their votes, or even if they didn't vote, their comments on that post. To show my appreciation -- for reading, for commenting, for joining in my card talk even if it might …

Return of the king

(If you haven't voted for your favorite Bert Campaneris '70s card in the last post, I invite you to do so).

So you've been away for a few years and want everyone to know that you're back.

How do you do that?

Do what The Diamond King did when he returned to card blogging last month: Bombard readers with contests and giveaways! Well, you've certainly gotten MY attention, sir!

I'll start with the giveaways first. Since he returned, the Diamond King has issued multiple "Diamond King 9" giveaways, straight out of the chute and rapid fire in the last month-plus. As I've said before, I am very slow to get to these "first come, first serve" giveaways. I used to think "I spend too much time on the computer" and now I realize "I don't spend enough time on the computer at all!"

But I was able to nab two cards out of the many giveaways.


I won this key 1981 Fleer Star Sticker of The Hawk. I have since acquired several more &#…