Skip to main content

When I can, while I can

 
A little more than two months ago I added this 1952 Topps Duke Snider to my collection during a card show.
 
That apparently woke me up out of my indifference over the 1952 set. No, I'm not attempting to collect it. I'm not even looking to add all of the Dodgers in the set.
 
But at some point after getting the Snider, I decided to see what I could do about getting the rest of the low-number Dodgers.
 
Just the other day one of those cards arrived.
 

 This is such an odd card. Jim Russell had not played for the Braves for three years when this card was issued. He was with Brooklyn in 1950 and 1951, and in '51 he appeared in just 18 games with the Dodgers, spending most of the season with Triple A Montreal. He wouldn't appear in another major league game.
 
His obvious Braves hat and uniform is also the reason that it was one of the last '52 Dodgers I looked to get. He doesn't look like a Dodger at all!
 
Condition is not a requirement with adding these '52 cards and especially Mr. Russell here. I found one for 5 bucks (that still seems too low for a '52 card) and added it happily.
 

That's the 73-year-old back, as it should look as a septuagenarian. Kids had it so rough back then they had to use their baseball cards to handle household chores like scrubbing the floors.
 
That's probably the least-interesting '52 Dodger in my collection, but I added a more interesting card from the team set just before this one.
 

I found a Gil Hodges in my budget, too. Gil's cards have never been that expensive but ever since he joined the Hall of Fame I've noticed a bump in the price of his cards. It's nice to get this card while I can, and I do appreciate people making very off-condition cards available instead of slabbing everything in the world for an inflated price.
 
My '52 Hodges is obviously off-center with a bottom border missing completely. There are also creases all over the card. But that beautiful orange background is almost as vibrant as it was in 1952. Its appeal is still apparent even in poor condition.
 

My Hodges is a red back and nice-and-readable except for some slight paper loss. As mentioned before, I'm not attempting to collect all the black and red back variations.
 
The addition of these three '52 Dodgers in the last two-plus months means I need just one more low-number and that's Billy Loes. I've been looking around for an affordable copy and hope to land one in the next couple of weeks.
 
I think part of me realized that these cards might someday be elusive no matter what condition if I don't do something when I can, while I can. In general, many of the older cards that I've enjoyed hunting have gone up in price over the last five years and I hope someday there will be a downturn but I don't see that happening right now.
 
So when I do get that Loes card, there will a little celebration on this blog. As for the SIXTEEN high-number Dodgers that are practically impossible to land unless you made a killing in real estate, I'm not even going to concern myself with them. If something falls out of the sky into my collection -- well, that's just about the only way I will own one. 

Comments

Anonymous said…
That's a great way to look at tracking down those early Topps cards. My viewpoint (and circumstances) as well.
Bo said…
Great adds!
Old Cards said…
$5 is a great price. I bought a 1960 Topps Willie Mays for $5. It had a tear, but none of the card is missing and the rest of the card is not bad.

Interesting that Hodges started as a catcher. Always thought it was odd that his 1961 Topps card shows his position as First Base-Catcher. I don't know if he played any games at catcher in 1960-1961, but it would seem unlikely, especially at that stage in his career.
Brett Alan said…
@Old Cards--you're right--his last appearance as a catcher was one inning in 1958. The last time he started as a catcher (or even caught for more than 2 innings) was 1948. My guess is that someone at Topps heard or read something indicating the Dodgers were planning to use him at the position again, but why would anyone have suggested that?
Nick Vossbrink said…
Congrats on the progress. I finished my attainable 1952 Giants (all lows minus the one which costs more than the highs) a year ago. Even though I think this is one of the most overrated sets out there (design is clunky (as shown whenever it's reused) and the artwork is frequently mid) the Topps hype is just so strong that I can't help but also get that giddy thrill when I see that I have a dozen of them in my Giants binder.
Yeah that airbrushed Braves cap on Russell totally looks weird in and of itself. They should of just airbrushed Brooklyns cap.
kcjays said…
Congratulations on the “new” cards.
Never say never on the high number Dodgers cards. That’s the fun part about collecting. You never know what you’re going to find when you’re out looking, at shows or on the internet.
Fuji said…
I think you're right about these drying up and becoming elusive with each passing day. I only have one A's player. The good thing about collecting the A's is that there aren't any hall of famers for me to track down. I'm gonna try and add some to my next COMC order.
jacobmrley said…
There is no shame in the 1983 reprints for those high numbers. 52 high numbers are insanity,
Stack22 said…
While '52 has it's flaws in design, I think they're outweighed by it's place in history. Somehow these cards just feel heavier in your hand when you hold them.
Jafronius said…
Congrats on the pickups!