Monday, June 4, 2018

Not your average throw-in


I think most baseball card bloggers are familiar with "throw-ins."

Those are the extra cards that a fellow collector sends in a package of goodies for another collector. They are "throw-ins" because they are cards that weren't specifically agreed to in the transaction or, more likely, cards that don't fit the recipient's collecting M.O.

So, for me, if I'm getting some cards in a trade, anything that isn't a Dodger card, a set need, an oddball or a card or player I've repeatedly praised on the blog is a "throw-in."

I've received many, many throw-ins over the years, from "what the heck is this Padre doing with these cards?" to "hey, all right, I can use this!" But I received a throw-in the other day that really classes up the definition of a throw-in.

It came from Nick of Dime Boxes, mixed in with a bunch of other cards that shows that he knows me very well.

Such as ...



... well, here are the oddballs now! The best kind of oddballs. 1970s oddballs!

These are both from the 1979 Hostess set. The Joe Morgan photo is a rerun from the 1978 Topps set, like we didn't see that photo enough in '78.


Here is another Joe Morgan Hostess, with a much looser cut. You really get a good idea on this 1976 card of how wee Morgan was.


This 1977 Hostess Steve Garvey card -- stained and all -- is in much better shape than the one sitting in my binder.

It also happens to be a Hostess Twinkie Garvey as the back features the tell-tale black bar. I'm not one to collect variations like that, but I admit it got me a little excited.


The oddballs keep on coming with this 1982 TCMA card of Hondo.



And this Baseball Hall of Shame card -- is this a Dodger card? Yeah, this is a Dodger card -- of Bill Bergen, well-known as one of the worst players in the Dodgers' long history.


These are some more TCMA oddballs, reprints from the 1980s.

And speaking of reprints ...


These are reprints of the 1922 American Caramel E120 series. I have no idea when they were made, although I assume it was the 1980s, when the vast majority of reprints were created.

At least I think these are reprints. If not, then never mind about that throw-in card that's coming up. These just blew that one away.



Nick provided another direct strike to my collection with an assortment of Allen & Ginter minis as candidates for my frankenset binder.

Let's see -- if I were to choose, I'd like to see Rollins and Ventura, and maybe Barry Melrose in my frankenset binder. However, the frankenset binder has the last word, so let's see what it said.



Oh, man. What the heck? THESE are the guys that join the binder? A college football coach, a PED liar and a Mets washout?

I need to have a talk with the frankenset.


Nick added some Dodgers of the major card company variety as well. I don't know how he does it, now that my want lists are not even close to being accurate, but he found a number of Dodgers that I needed.


A bunch from the 1990s. All needs.



And here are some more recent ones. Also all needs.


All those above cards are from my collecting interests. Dodgers. Minis. Oddballs. All stuff that I know and love and other people know that I know and love, too.

Now for the throw-in:


That's a 1968 Topps Hank Aaron.

Sure there's a lengthy crease in the card. Do I care? I do not.

Let's count all the ways on why this is by definition a "throw-in."

-- Aaron was never a Dodger.

-- I am not attempting to complete the 1968 Topps set, nor do I ever intend to try.

-- I don't really collect Hall of Famers like a lot of collectors do.

So, yeah, this is a throw-in.

However ...

If there is one aspect of my collection that makes me a bit insecure it's the lack of vintage cards from the 1950s and 1960s. The vast majority of cards that I own from this time period -- and this has been the way it's been for the last 40 years -- are tied up in my Dodger collection or in a specific set completion quest.

I have relatively few "just random" cards from 1970 and earlier.

I want to do something about that, but, heck, I collect so much other stuff, I may never get there.

Yet, The Hammer just helped me get there in a big way.

Yeah, I don't have a lot of cards from the '50s and '60s that aren't Dodgers or part of the 1956 Topps set. But I now have a 1968 Topps Hank Aaron.

It was a throw-in.

10 comments:

  1. Nick's knack for knowing your needs is top notch! His generosity abounds! I often pick up vintage for no reason other than aesthetic purposes. Most of my pre-1970 cards are non-Tigers. Too hard to ignore beautiful old cardboard, stuff I like to call art.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Definitely not your everyday "throw in"

    ReplyDelete
  3. Oh dang! Here, here for throw ins...a class act by Nick all the way around.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You can thank my dad for that Aaron -- he bought it cheap at a card show a few months back thinking I needed it when I actually already had a copy. I've been sitting on it since then trying to decide where its best home might be, and then I remembered you when I was putting the rest of that trade package together. Glad Hammerin' Hank was to your liking, and that you needed a fair amount of the rest of the Dodgers/oddballs in there!

    P.S. -- I'm about 99 percent sure those American Caramels are reprints, but I too had the slight inkling that they might be real. I found them in a random box at the card show last month. Never seen/felt a real one in-person so I can't really say.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If those caramel cards aren't reprints, that might be one of the coolest finds in card show history. As for that Hammerin' Hank... yea, that's a pretty darn decent throw in!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lastings Milledge is also a Pirates washout! Nick knows how to put together a trade package!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I totally get the non-collection vintage. I only have 180 cards that are Flagship '52-'69 that are not part of my team collection. Each one is kind of a little treasure.

    ReplyDelete
  8. A vintage Aaron is avery generous throw-in, in any condition! '68 Topps is one of my favorite sets; I know the burlaps are not popular - but neither am I ;)

    ReplyDelete
  9. The '76 Morgan Hostess photo is an alternate from the same set of photos Topps used for their '73 Morgan card.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yeah... I'd say that's a pretty solid throw-in. Those Hostess cards aren't too shabby either.

    ReplyDelete