I have no problem with how anyone in the hobby wants to collect. Their preferences are their own and I'm glad they're happy.
If the way they collect is different from mine, there's a good chance I won't understand it. But still, their way is their way and mine is mine and we can co-exist peacefully, each collecting in our own corner.
Except in one instance. There is this one type of collecting that interferes with how I collect. In fact, our two kinds of collecting often butts heads.
I'm referring to player collecting, a popular style of collecting for the last 30-to-35 years but something that I am on record as not understanding and I admit I've called it names in the past. But it's probably just the frustration of being a set collector coming out.
Set collecting was king when I was a kid in the '70s and remained that way all through my first stage of collecting into the mid-1980s. We '70s set-collectors rarely encountered other collectors hoarding certain players. Sure, if we wanted a particular star player, it might cost us a few cards for that one card, but it wasn't particularly tough.
Flash forward to today and the few set collectors around have to contend with Soto collectors and Tatis collectors and Franco collectors. Whoever is "hot" in the hobby is almost guaranteed to be one of the last few cards that a set collector needs to finish a set -- if they're still trying to collect modern sets these days (I've stopped doing that). I'm also pretty certain that Topps makes certain popular players tougher to pull -- witness Kris Bryant 6 or 7 years ago -- because it knows the player and set collectors will fight over that card.
So, a week or two ago, Daniel of It's Like Having My Own Card Shop offered up some extras for free as sort of a prize for reading his blog. I grabbed a few cards at random, but one card I made certain to take first was this one:
I have no urge to collect Ken Griffey Jr. cards -- I'm one of the few on the planet who doesn't care whether I ever own the 1989 Upper Deck Junior -- and 1993 Pinnacle is not a set I immediately plan to pursue, although I do like it.
I just grabbed it because why should the bazillion Junior collectors out there have all the fun? I know they all have this card already, but I DON'T because THERE'S A BAZILLION JUNIOR COLLECTORS -- and it's nice to get my hands on one.
If I had to make a list -- and I'm about to -- Griffey is the single most difficult player to acquire when chasing down a set, even though he's just one player in a set of 792 or whatever. I have 70 Griffey Jr. cards in my collection, which is about the 120th most in my collection for any player. But considering the number of Junior cards available -- I can only guess at the insane number -- that total is paltry. And almost all of them in my collection are related to sets I've collected.
Except for this one, which is MINE. ALL MIIIIINNNNEEEE!
OK, so if Griffey is the most difficult player to find for this set collector who are some of the others?
Here are four more:
2. STEVE GARVEY
I'm one to talk here. As a Dodger fan and also a team collector, I tend to grab whatever Garvey card I spot. He is popular with us collectors who grew up in the 1970s and oh, don't I know it.
I don't consider Garvey an obstacle when collecting sets, it's more from a team collector perspective. His cards are quite persnickety to find once you get past all the main flagship ones. He has one of the biggest fan clubs among collectors that I know for someone who isn't in the Hall of Fame.
And I probably threw him on this list because just today I went to purchase a certain Garvey card and -- not a surprise at all -- I was told it was sold out. Again.
3. TONY GWYNN
Yes, I still need this card for my 1985 Fleer set ...
Tony Gwynn is part of the triumvirate of players that collectors of a certain era apparently all decided at a meeting to collect. I didn't know of such a thing until I started blogging and discovered a bunch of collectors collected cards of Gwynn, Frank Thomas and Greg Maddux. "All you guys?" I thought. And "just those three?" I thought after that.
It was tough from someone coming from the set-collecting world, and who had been out of the hobby for much of the 1990s, to wrap my head around. I'm a bit used to it now, but it's still aggravating when Gwynn is repeatedly the last card I need to finish the set. His cards aren't cheap, you know, although I suppose it could be worse.
I could be collecting '50s sets and looking for Mantles.
4. ROBERTO CLEMENTE
This is the most understandable hard-to-find player on this list. But it's well-known that Clemente cards have gone up in demand significantly over the last 20-to-30 years. That tells me there are a lot more Clemente player collectors than there used to be.
I actually haven't struggled too much to find Clemente's cards in the sets I've collected. I've been lucky that two of the cards, the 1971 one here and the 1973, were gifts.
But his cards are so weighty that I remember the day and the circumstances of finding his cards. I just picked up the 1970 Topps Clemente last month during a shopping trip to a flea market with my wife and daughter. I bought the 1972 Clemente at a card show, the same day a deer ran into my vehicle.
And as I write this I am regretting trading away the '69 Clemente when I was in high school.
5. DWIGHT EVANS
I've whined about this before. This is definitely a thing but I don't know why it's a thing.
Dwight Evans was a very good player, and a key figure for the 1975 Boston Red Sox team. His career lasted a long time and he's one of those underrated figures who people think should get some Hall of Fame attention.
But why is his card repeatedly one of the last I need to finish a set? I honestly have never heard of a Dwight Evans player collector, but his '75 card was one of the last I needed more than 15 years ago. He was a tough find when collecting the '73 set and even for some early '80s sets. Weird.
I picked a smattering of other cards in Daniel's giveaway, none featuring players that have cause me set-collecting heartburn.
Four Diamond Kings from the 1983 Donruss set. I grabbed them for that day in the future when I try to complete the '83 set. And I already have the Tony Gwynn card, so HA!
I will always pounce on a food-issue oddball. I need to see what else I need from this Jimmy Dean set.
I know there are other players who are favorites of player collectors that cause set collectors to scramble. Mike Trout and Derek Jeter are two of the big ones. Ichiro, too. But I didn't include them because I haven't tried to complete a large modern set since 2015, so those players haven't caused me much grief. But I can see how they would.
Unless I'm trying to finish a set, I'm content to let the player collectors have the cards they want to accumulate. You want to collect all the Luis Roberts? Go nuts.
But if he's part of a set I'm trying to finish, we're going to have a fight.
Comments
Also weirdly, Nelson Liriano was the last guy i needed for at least a couple of sets.
And Sabo was missing in several Upper Deck sets including the last one for 1990 and i have no idea why. I have plenty of his cards including that Jimmy Dean right there
Now, it's Tigers cards, and my favorite players, Bill Freehan, Matthew Boyd, Miguel Cabrera, Brooks Robinson.
Oh, that Steve Garvey card is terrific.
As for players I usually need to complete sets: Trout and Jeter.
I'd look at every card and as nerdy as it sounds, I'd "get to know" the players. Then I started souring on sports. Lockouts. Strikes. Big contracts. I didn't want to look much at my cards anymore. Around that time, I decided to collect only my favourite players. Less obligation to shell out money if I didn't feel like it, since the end goal wasn't to get all 792 cards in the set, it was what I defined it to be. I've never looked back. I've even blown up a few sets for trade fodder.
What I don't understand is hoarding for the sake of hoarding. Why do you need 200 copies of 1989 Score Ernie Whitt anyway? (just a made up example)
Much more recently I recently completed '74 and '75 Topps, and Mike Schmidt was just about the last one in both. Quite a difference.
Oddly enough as a Red Sox team collector the player that I am missing on countless team sets is Nomar. My theory is that he was a big star in the 90s and early 2000s so a whole lot of people semi collected him. Maybe not totally collected him but at least kept his cards all together for trades or whatever. Then all those collectors quit the hobby so there are millions adn million (we are talking the 90s) of Nomars sitting in boxes in closets all over the country.
For the record, if anyone is ever one card #55 away from completing the 1987 Topps set, I'll happily send you a copy.
I even put "of course" next to Derek Jeter on my wantlists because he was the most often missing guy. After him came Trout and a couple others. My modern set collecting is diminishing too.
I like my player collections the best of all, though. The diversity is so much fun, and the ability to usually find something from them at every show or shop.
With so many people going after the huge names (for collecting and "investing") I am so discouraged from joining that crowd. The lower level guys are so much easier to find. The really obscure guys who have far fewer cards are even better. Unless you really idolize someone like Trout, how could you possibly be satisfied with a collection of his unless you severely limit it to the really plentiful stuff?
I can see the present situation going to the extreme in several years where all the huge high dollar rookie cards will be totally unreachable (or at least all bought up) so that completing a set that contains one or many of them will be completely impossible, or unaffordable except if you can shell out five digit prices. And all the collections of these new people will look exactly the same since all they want is high dollar rookies. Boring....