Month: April 2017

T206 Misspelled Names: Sorry Pal, We Got Your Name Wrong!

I’m pleased to bring you another fun guest article from my friend Scott Gross.  Thanks Scott!  Enjoy!

If you’re lucky enough to get a Baseball card, you would like to think the producers would get your name spelled correctly. Well, with T206s, that was not always the case. Of the 524 cards in the set, there are 24 misspelled names. Maybe that isn’t so bad considering that T206s were one of the first, and certainly biggest issues of the day. Also, these were cheap advertising, so getting them into circulation could easily have been more important than 100% correctness. Have to cut them some slack.

The list below was taken from the grand website t206resource.com (as well as Print Group information). I did exclude three names off their list. Two McGraws and LaPorte. In my opinion the gaps between McGraw and Mc Graw, and LaPorte and La Porte are not significant misspellings.

Of course, the most famous misspelling is that of Magie. This mistake was corrected very early on in Print Group 1(to the correct Magee). So early that the Magie card is much rarer, and sought after by many T206 collectors. My first thought when thinking about this article was Magie/Magee was done just because he was the only Print Group 1 card. Figuring that the producers wanted everything done right in this initial printing. This is not correct. In fact, there are eight other misspellings in Group 1.

Now, arguably most of these are not household names. Good, decent players, but maybe not good enough to double check them in production. The one that jumps out at me the most is Brown/Browne. He was about the same level of player as Magee. Both were everyday outfielders for non-pennant winning teams, and had similar stats between 1904-09 (Browne, NY National, 275 BA; Magee, Philadelphia National, 291 BA). So why was Magie corrected and not Brown ? Who knows !!!

Another oddity is the trio of Goode, Livingstone, and Violat. Where the correct names are, in general, more popular spellings. Almost had to go out of their way to be wrong. However, with most others, the different ways of spelling are probably close to even. I wish I had an old phone book (remember those ??!!) to verify that.

The ones I find the most interesting are those who have multiple cards, and yet have both correct and incorrect spellings:

Doolin is misspelled on his Portrait from the 150-350 Series. However, was corrected in his later Bat and Fielding cards. Same with Magee Fielding, and Meyers Portrait. Being misspelled initially, and then corrected.

Then, there are my favorites. The ones where the player’s name was originally correct, yet later poses were changed to incorrect !!!!!

Nicholls hands on knees is correct in his first printing, then incorrect (Nichols), on the subsequent batting pose. The same for the initially correct Willett batting, which was followed by the incorrectly spelled Willetts (throwing). Just couldn’t leave well enough alone. The most bizarre, is Mullen/Mullin. Who goes from correct (Mullin throwing) in Print Group 1, to incorrect (Mullen portrait) in Group 2, then back to correct (Mullin with bat) in Group 3.

Finally, let us not for get good old Harry Lentz, who’s correct name is Sentz. At least the others are recognizable …………….. “Sorry, buddy, we misspelled your name!!!!!”

Written by Scott Gross

George Stone’s Monster 1906 Season

T206 George Stone Old Mill

George Stone came out of nowhere in 1905 as a 28 year-old rookie.  Well, not exactly nowhere.  He spent the entire 1904 season in Milwaukee, dominating the American Association.  It’s hard to believe he stayed in the Minors all year given the stats he was putting up.  He hit .406 with a .558 Slugging Percentage to go with 36 Doubles, 19 Triples, and 7 Home Runs.  Prior the the 1905 season, he had played just 2 games in the Major Leagues, both with the Boston Red Sox in 1903.

In 1905, he played in every single game for the St. Louis Browns.  That in itself is pretty impressive, but more importantly, he played at an extremely high level.  A rundown of his achievements in 1905 is enough to make your head spin.  He led the AL in Plate Appearances (691), Hits (187) and Total Bases (259).  His .296 Batting Average ranked 6th and his .756 On Base Plus Slugging Percentage ranked 4th among American Leaguers.  A rookie in the truest sense of the word, George Stone posted the 4th highest Offensive WAR (4.8) in the AL.

Stone’s T3 Turkey Red Cabinet

Following Stone’s stellar 1905 campaign, expectations were no doubt high for him in 1906.  However, I can’t imagine that anyone expected what came next.

In less Plate Appearances (658 v.s. 691 in 1905) George Stone put up one of the most impressive offensive displays of the Deadball Era.  He led the AL in Batting Average (.358), On Base Percentage (.417), Slugging Percentage (.501) and OPS (.918).

George Stone E92 Nadja Caramel

His 91 Runs Scored were 5th in the AL and his 71 Runs Batted in were good for 6th.  He again led the league in Total Bases. this time with an astounding 291.  His 208 Hits were 2nd only to Lajoie’s 214.  Stone’s 20 triples trailed only Elmer Flick among American Leaguers.  He finished third in the AL in Home Runs with 6, which trailed Harry Davis’ 12 and Charlie Hickman’s 9.

George Stone’s historic 1906 season was worth 8.7 Wins Above Replacement, which ranked 3rd in the AL behind only Nap Lajoie’s 10.0 and Terry Turner’s 9.4.  Take only offensive metrics into consideration, and Stone’s year at the plate looks even better.  His Offensive Wins Above Replacement of 7.9 ranked 1st in the American League.  This time he edged out Lajoie’s 7.6.  Flick was a distant 3rd at 6.2 and Harry Davis and Turner tied for 4th at 5.2.

Stone had another great year with the Browns in 1907.  He hit .320 and put up an OPS of .787.  In 1908 he took a step back, but still posted a solid campaign with a .281 Batting Average and .714 OPS.  He played his final major league game in 1910 at the age of 33.  Stone is one of many Deadball Era stars who had short careers.  He only played 6 season of Major League ball (7 if you count the two games he played in 1903) but he definitely left his mark on the sport.

Today, many T206 collectors look at a George Stone card and think “common”.  But the truth is he was anything but.

Auction Report: Love of the Game Spring Premier Auction 2017

2 Comments on Auction Report: Love of the Game Spring Premier Auction 2017

 

It’s been a couple weeks since the most recent Love of the Game Auction came to a close.  In the future I’ll try to be a little more prompt with my auction summaries, but better late than never I figure.  As always, Al had a little something for everyone.

Red Hindu John McGraw PSA 3mc sells for $1,560
Two things stood out to me about this McGraw Red Hindu.  First, it has a crazy, somewhat distracting diamond-cut.  Second, it has one of the deepest red backs I’ve ever seen.  The back is just incredible.  I thought this went for a very reasonable price, and I bet the new owner is stoked to own it.

Carolina Brights Bill Abstein SGC 40 sells for $1,599
Continuing the recent upward trend for the higher tier backs, this Abstein achieved a strong hammer price.  Like the McGraw, the back on this one is exquisite.  The card is also very nice for the grade, without any signs of a crease or wrinkle.

Ty Cobb Green Background Portrait SGC 20 sells for $2,160
Green Cobbies continue to be red hot.  This one has solid eye appeal for the grade and sold for a strong price.

Broad Leaf 350 Tris Speaker PSA A sells for $615
I remember seeing the title of this listing and getting really excited.  But, then I saw the card.  I can’t help but feel a little sad when I see a rare and significant front/back combo like this that is so badly mangled.  On the bright side, I’m definitely happy that it survived all these years.

Cycle 460 Cy Young SGC A sells for $510
I thought this card went for a reasonable price.  Cycle 460s are under-appreciated in my opinion, and the premium paid for this one was only about 2x the price of a similar condition common back.

Brown Hindu Nap Lajoie portrait goes for $400
Another rare back with back issues, this one is a bit different than the Speaker above.  The buyer no doubt thought that most of the paper loss/addition was the latter and that the card’s appearance could be much improved by a soak.  I had this thought and was actually in on the bidding early but dropped out without making a serious run at it.  For the condition this one is in, I feel $400 is a strong price that the consignor should be pleased with.

Piedmont Factory 42 Admiral Schlei batting sells for $366
Keeping with the theme of this auction, the back on this card is amazing.  It’s a deep, bold blue, probably the nicest Piedmont 42 back I have ever seen.  The slight mis-cut probably kept the price down because people who prefer PSA know that the card won’t cross over with the MC qualifier.  Still, an incredible card and a nice deal for the buyer.

T206 Donie Bush With Interesting Print Mark – But Only On the Rarest Backs?

High resolution scan of the Broad Leaf 350

Monday 4/17/2017:

Continuing with the recent theme of examining print oddities and errors, here is a Donie Bush with rare Broad Leaf 350 back that has a unique print error.  The area directly to the left of his glove appears to be missing the gray ink for his uniform, and as a result it looks pink to the naked eye.  As of now, this is the only known copy of Bush with a Broad Leaf 350 back, so there aren’t any others to compare this one to.

However, I was chatting with a friend about this card, and he sent me this scan, of a Donie Bush Carolina Brights that he once owned.  Note the the print defect in exactly the same spot.  I had examined a high resolution scan of the Broad Leaf and was convinced that the spot was missing ink, rather than altered in some way.  Often, when you see mark that looks like this, it will have been created by a eraser.  This Carolina Brights scan serves as a nice confirmation that both cards were printed with the pink spot at the factory.

Upon being alerted as to the existence of this Carolina Brights card, I began to scour the internet looking for other examples with the same “pink spot”.  What I found was quite surprising.  So far, I have not found a single copy of Bush with a common back that exhibits the flaw.  No Piedmont, Sweet Caporal, Polar Bear, Old Mill, or Sovereign backs that I found had the “pink spot”.  However, the lone Cycle 350 that I found did have it:

Wednesday 4/19/2017:

After finding the Cycle 350 scan, I spent the next couple days looking for other examples of the “pink spot”.  I posted a thread on net54 asking for scans and reached out to a few friends.  The net54 query paid off immediately when long-time back collector Brian Weisner reached out to me with scans of the Carolina Brights above, and an American Beauty below, which does not have the print flaw.  Brian told me that the “pink spot” appears on 2 of the 5 Donie Bush Carolina Brights that are known to exist.

This American Beauty does not exhibit the “pink spot” print anomaly

At that point, I was pretty sure that I wouldn’t find any common backs with the print flaw, but that changed when Pat Romolo joined the search.  Pat is the foremost expert in T206 Print Oddities/Anomalies.  Many of you are probably familiar with Pat’s Piedmont 150 Plate Scratch Project (ironically the thread was started by Steve Birmingham, who is the foremost expert on the printing process(es) used to create T206s) .  If not, you should definitely check it out.

Pat noted that Bush shares the same back profile as George McBride.  McBride has a print anomaly that Pat has been following, which he he has dubbed the “blue flame”.  McBride’s print anomaly has been found on the following backs:

So, theoretically with enough searching we may be able to find the “pink spot” anomaly on these same five backs above.  Later in the afternoon, Pat emailed me with the following scan:

At that point, my theory that the “pink spot” would only be found with the rarest backs was proven incorrect.  I’ll keep my eye out for more copies with this anomaly, and possibly post an update sometime in the future.  As of now, I have not seen a scan of a Piedmont 350 with the “pink spot” but based on the existence of the SC 350/30 above, I imagine there are some out there.

The T206 George Gibson with Ghost Image That Sold Last Weekend

This little gem was sold last weekend via PWCC Auctions.  The auction boasted an impressive array of T206s, and this one was kind of buried among the offerings.  It was listed as “Ghost Image” due to the dark rectangle that appears over the front of the bottom 90% of the card.  When I first saw it, I was pretty sure I knew what the faint lighter image on the on the ghost overprint was, but I needed to verify.  I am not particularly good with Photo Shop, but I thought it might be fun to show the process I used to figure out who the ghost was anyway

I thought it looked like the ghost overprint was upside down, so first I turned the image upside down:

In this particular case, I had a hunch of who the ghost might be right when I first saw the card.  However, there have been plenty of times when I haven’t been so sure when looking at a T206 with a ghost image.  In those cases, the first step in the sleuthing process is to identify any distinguishing marks (or in this case, the spots on the ghost overprint which are lighter than the rest of the ghost).

Once you’ve found some spots to look for, you need to go through other cards that were printed in the same series.  In this case, Gibson is a 150-350 subject and this card has a Piedmont 150 back.  So, if the ghost overprint features another T206 pose, it will be one of the other 155 poses from the Piedmont 150 checklist.  When I am searching for a possible match, I like to use the checklists at T206resource.com and click on the scan links at the right side of the page.  You can scroll through the entire 150-350 Series checklist on this page.

Like I mentioned earlier, I had a hunch right away.  I pulled up this pose, and found an immediate match:

I wish I had the Photo Shop skills of Chris Browne or Erick Summers, but unfortunately this is the best I can do.  If you look closely, you can see that the previously identified lighter spots on Gibson line up perfectly with Eddie Cicotte’s right arm and the creases in his pants.  How this card might have come to exist is a mystery to me.  I suppose the lighter ghost print could have come first, with the printer’s realizing that the sheet was placed upside down and then turning it around and printing the entire card again.  This fun error card sold for $249.83.  I imagine most bidders were not sure what they were looking at, but the winner most likely knew that the ghost was Cicotte.

Does the Huge Price Tag for the T206 Magie Error Make Sense?

This copy sold via Love of the Game Auctions for $15, 340 in 2013

As a T206 back collector, I tend to think about cards in terms of value.  Which backs are over-valued?  Which are under-valued?  Which cards are over-rated, and which are under-appreciated?  My favorite part of collecting this set is searching for value and scarcity, especially when it is hiding in plain sight.

It can be hard to impress T206 collectors.  There are hundreds of specific front/back combos that exist in quantities of less than 10 and are met with a collective yawn from collectors when they hit the market.  If a Cycle 350 Shad Barry SGC 30 goes to auction, it’s likely to sell for less than $100.  If a Demmitt Polar Bear SGC 30 goes to auction, it will probably sell for around $1,000.  PSA and SGC have combined to grade 4 copies of the Barry Cycle 350 and 278 copies of Demmitt Polar Bear.  Pretty crazy when you really look at the numbers.

Obviously the Demmitt, O’Hara, and Magie cards are more highly sought after than a random Cycle 350 with a low population.  The main reason is that many set collectors feel the need to own a Magie, O’Hara and Demmitt for their sets.  However, there are plenty of T206 collectors who are not necessarily attempting to complete the set.  For those people, I really wonder if the massive price tags for these 3 cards makes sense.

PSA has graded 118 copies of the Magie error (which only exists with a Piedmont 150 back).  SGC has graded 62 of them.  So, according to the Pop Reports, there are 180 Magie errors out there.  Of course there have probably been some crossovers, but there are probably some raw copies out there too.

Sold for $1,028 via PWCC Auctions over the weekend

A few days ago, this PSA 4 Sherry Magee portrait with El Principe de Gales back sold for $1,028 via PWCC Auctions.  PSA and SGC have combined to grade only 11 copies of this card.

Sold for $2,022 via Goodwin & Co. Auctions in 2016

Earlier in the year, Goodwin and Co. auctioned off the above Old Mill Magee portrait in an SGC 40 holder.  It sold for $2,022.  PSA and SGC have graded a combined 4 copies of this card.

The Pop Report Numbers for Magee Portrait with Hindu and Sovereign 150 backs are similarly low in comparison to the iconic Magie Error:

The Old Mill above is so rare that it’s almost non-existent, and yet it sold for just 13% of the $15,340 that the PSA 3 Magie pictured at the top of this article went for.  We know that there is more to value than the supply side of the equation, but I can’t help but come to the conclusion that the Magie Error is over-valued.  As long as collectors continue to covet the Magie Error to the extent they have historically, prices will remain high.  With more information available to us via the Pop Reports, it’s possible that prices will adjust over time to be more in line with actual scarcity (or the lack thereof).

An Interesting Double Stamped T206 Sweet Caporal Back

I recently came across this beauty.  Since my most recent article concerns the printing process for T206s, it seemed fitting that I write up a little post about it.

At first glance, it looks like the back has a Wet Sheet Transfer from another Sweet Caporal back.  However, if that were the case, the transfer would be reversed and the words would be backwards.  I’m not 100% sure what caused this.  But, the fact that the second, lighter printing is aligned in the same direction and slightly offset leads me to believe that it was printed at the time of production.  My best guess is the backs were printed once as normal, and then printed again, except that the ink on the blanket was mostly gone and just shows up as a faint shadow on the card above.

I haven’t seen another card like this one, but it does remind me of a pair of double stamped Sweet Caporal 350 factory 30 backs I have seen in the past.  I once owned this McCormick.  I also know of a Matty McIntyre with the same double printed back.  I believe both are from the same sheet.

The obvious difference is that it appears the McCormick back was actually fully printed twice, as the ink is almost as dark on the second printing (slightly above the first).

If anyone has seen any similar cards, I’d love to hear about it.  Please shoot me a message via the contact link at the top of the page or via email at luke@thatT206life.com.

The T206 Piedmont 150 “Cylinder Print Ghosts”

*This article features insight on the printing process used to create T206s courtesy of Steve Birmingham.  Thanks Steve!

The Piedmont 150 Cylinder Print Ghosts are among my favorite T206 print oddities.  They are unique in that the ghost image on the back is a crystal clear mirror image of the front.  Cylinder prints are not exclusive to Piedmont 150 backs, but the most high profile Cylinder Prints are all from presumably the same Piedmont 150 sheet.  There are some blank backs that have portions of the front image reversed on the back and I’ve seen a couple Piedmont 350s, but those are a subject for a different article.

To the best of my knowledge (and memory) this is the current checklist of known Piedmont 150 Cylinder Print Ghosts:

  • Bowerman
  • Chance red portrait (there are actually two of these)
  • Clarke portrait
  • Elberfeld NY
  • Gilbert
  • Overall portrait
  • Shaw St. Louis
  • Weimer (two of these are known)
  • Young bare hand shows

Here are some recent sales of the known copies:

  • Clarke portrait SGC 60 – SOLD for $4,200 in 2016 via REA
  • Elberfeld NY GAI 4.5 – SOLD for $2,160 in 2016 via REA
  • Young bare hand shows PSA 5 – SOLD for $2,350 in 2008 via REA

In order to understand how these beauties were created, I reached out to my friend Steve Birmingham, an expert on printing processes.  His explanation is as follows:

Cylinder prints can happen for anything printed by offset lithography.  Interesting fact- A cylinder print on an earlier flatbed press is what led to the invention of offset lithography.  There are two basic sorts of press, flatbed offset and rotary.  There’s proof that in general T206s were printed on flatbed presses, so I’ll stick to those at first.

On the flatbed press the prepared stone is placed on the bed.  It has areas that are coated with a substance that repels water and the limestone will hold water.  The stone is dampened, and then inked.  On most flatbed presses there’s a carriage that moves the stone across the dampening , inking and offset rollers/cylinders.  Once inked the inked image is transferred to the blanket.  Next, the cylinder with the blanket turns up against the impression cylinder which may also have a rubber covering.  The paper is squeezed in between them, making the image print from the blanket to the paper.  And all is well!

Except the flatbed presses were mostly hand fed, and occasionally a paper sheet wouldn’t be fed in to print. In that case, the image would transfer to the impression cylinder. The next sheet would then get a reversed impression on the opposite side as well as the normal impression on the correct side.

And that’s where cylinder prints come from.

Of note, generally at the time the colors were printed one at a time. Being an accident the cylinder impression should only be one color. I’ve seen some indication that a two color press may have been used, but so far no two color cylinder impressions.  A genuine one would be a real prize, as proof that a 2 color press was actually used.

Identification is usually pretty easy, as the impression will have lots of detail compared to a normal offset transfer, (Or WST as most people call them.) It is possible to have a fully detailed normal offset transfer, it just requires quite a bit of pressure on the stack of sheets. Most times there isn’t enough remaining wetness or enough pressure.

On more modern presses the impression cylinder is smooth metal with no rubber coating. But with the blanket being rubber, cylinder Impressions can still happen. Also the plate is on a roller and there’s no moving carriage, just a few more rollers.

*The bulk of this article (all of the technical stuff) was written by Steve Birmingham.  Thank you Steve!

T206 Sweet Caporal 350 Factory 30 “Big Factory Numbers”

A fun oddity to keep an eye for are the “Big Factory 30s”.  Certain poses from the 150-350 series can be found with a large “30” right in the middle at the bottom of the back, like this Tannehill above.  It appears that the large “30” was used to differentiate sheets of Sweet Caporal 350 factory 30 from Sweet Caporal 350 factory 25, and vice versa.

There have not been any of these “Big Factory Numbers” found on Sweet Caporal 150 backs that I know of.  My guess is there were some problems in the print shop during 150 series production that lead to them adding these large numbers to the sheets for the 350 series, so that the process of getting them out to the correct factories would run more smoothly.  This article focuses on the Big Factory 30s, mainly because we have more data about them.  There are 22 different poses that have been found with a “Big Factory 30”, while I only know of two players who have been found with a “Big Factory 25” (Ames portrait and Steinfeldt portrait).

Here are the 22 poses which have been found with Sweet Caporal 350 “Big Factory 30s”.  I expect that more will be discovered, but for now this is the known checklist.  Thank you to Erick Summers for keeping track of these over on the net54 forum.

  • Ames (portrait)
  • Beaumont
  • Clarke (portrait)
  • Cobb (bat on shoulder)
  • Dahlen (Brooklyn)
  • Dooin
  • Durham
  • Gilbert
  • Hemphill
  • Johnson (portrait)
  • Jones, Fielder (portrait)
  • Keeler (with bat)
  • Killian (pitching)
  • Mathewson (portrait)
  • McGraw (no cap)
  • Merkle (portrait)
  • Overall (portrait)
  • Seymour (batting)
  • Spade
  • Steinfeldt (portrait)
  • Tannehill (“L” on front)
  • Wagner (bat left)

Erick and others have been keeping track of these oddities for the last few years in this thread on net54baseball.com.  If you have or know of any Sweet Caporal 350s with Big Factory Numbers at the bottom (either 25 or 30) please stop by that thread and add your card or scan to the list.

For the most part, each of these checklist entries represents a unique card.  However, some of the above poses have been found more than once.  I have seen three different Steinfeldts for instance.  Because not everyone knows about these cards, there are probably quite a few of them out there that have not been noticed yet.  Often the top of the “30” is just barely visible, and doesn’t look like much more than a bit of red ink.  This is another reason why these cards tend to fly under the radar.