My fourth and final–for now–box of Artifacts. Here’s what I got: Continue reading “2010-11 Artifacts Box Break #4”
1990-91 Pro Set prototype card
Brett Hull: The first of many prototype hockey cards in the 1990s
When the hockey card market expanded from two to five companies in 1990, promotional and prototype cards became all the rage. Such cards were given to card shops and collectors to show them what the new cards would look like, and to entice them to purchase the forthcoming sets. But these promo cards took on a life of their own, and were heavily sought by investors and collectors alike. Continue reading “1990-91 Pro Set prototype card”
Making the Grade
Two weeks ago, I asked readers of this blog if they collected graded cards. I also expressed my overall disdain of the whole card grading thing.
But earlier this year I sent in two cards to get graded. I figured that I couldn’t really have an opinion in the matter unless I experienced it.
Plus, Beckett gave me two free card gradings when I renewed my subscription to Beckett Hockey. What do I got to lose? Besides the postage fees, of course.
After careful consideration, I sent in the following 2 cards to Beckett Grading Services:
2008-09 Champ’s Hockey Neolithic Stone Tools – The reason I chose to get this card graded was that it is super thick, and I figured that a grading slab would be better protection than keeping it in the toploader it came in. Plus, this isn’t a card that I would display or put in a card page (obviously). So getting it slabbed seemed to be the way to go.
But would someone please explain how this card only received an 8.5? It went from Upper Deck to me to Beckett. OK, I did handle it for about 5 minutes when I scanned it for a Card of the Week article. But I didn’t play a game of flips with it or anything like that.
Next up…
2009-10 Fleer Ultra Ice Medallion James Van Riemsdyk 1/25 – I sent this card to get graded purely for investment reasons. One day, I hope to sell or trade it to a James Van Riemsdyk collector. The card has a print run of 25, and mine is numbered 1/25. It also got a Gem Mint rating (9.5). I think if someone was a JVR fan, this would be a pretty awesome card to own.
And though it did get the coveted Gem Mint rating, again I have to wonder about some of the numbers. Why did the centering receive a 9.5 and not 10? The card is printed full-bleed, so there aren’t any “borders” that appear larger on one side than the other, like with older cards. The surface received a 10, so Beckett does give a perfect score to some things.
I will admit that I like having these 2 cards graded. They are pretty sweet cards to own, and slabbing them will retain their condition. Should I ever trade or sell them, the condition would never be questioned. But it is unlikely that I am going to send a bunch of cards to get graded anytime soon. And I’ll still shake my head at those who grade or buy graded “common” cards from the 1970s or 1980s.
If you haven’t already done so, please vote in the poll about graded cards (upper-right corner of this website). I am curious to know other collector’s graded card buying habits.
2010-11 Artifacts Box Break #3
This is my third box of 2010-11 Artifacts Hockey. It was actually a very good box for me. Continue reading “2010-11 Artifacts Box Break #3”
Thanks, Michael
Just wanted to give a quick thanks to Michael Mah for generously donating five O-Pee-Chee checklists to my collection. Michael is a fellow blogger who also writes about collecting hockey autographs. You can see his blog here.
Question: Your own personal Joe Shlabotnik
My sister clipped this comic from the newspaper and gave it to me. I think we all can relate to Charlie Brown here. I know I can.
Ironically, it was my sister who always got the one card I wanted-needed-had-to-have when we were kids. Whoever was my personal “Joe Shlabotnik” at the time. Looking back is a bit fuzzy, but I remember two occurrences of this phenomenon:
#1 – 1989-90 Topps Pittsburgh Penguin sticker
In my freshman year of high school, I bought a box of 1989-90 Topps (36 packs), got the complete 198-card set but was 1 sticker shy of completing the 33-sticker set.
My sister bought 4 packs and got the one sticker I was missing: #16 – Pittsburgh Penguins.
I probably traded 20 or so various 1980s Penguins cards for this logo sticker. Negotiation was not my strong suit when I was a kid. Fortunately, I was in honors algebra that year, because 2 years later…
#2 – 1991-92 Upper Deck Eric Lindros Canada Cup
Bad luck struck again in fall of 1991. Now a Junior in high school, I bought 2 boxes (72 packs) of 1991-92 Upper Deck hockey cards. The one card I did not get was this short-printed card of Eric Lindros, which had a high Beckett value of $15 at the time.
My sister bought one pack and got this card. I am not exaggerating.
Both my sister and I were in honors math classes, but I’m 2 years older. I saved all my honors Algebra homework from my freshmen year, and ended up trading a semester’s worth for this card. I got to complete my set, and my sister got all the answers.
My sister and I talked during the Sharks-Canucks game last night. She could not remember any specific times when she got a card that I needed–she just remembered that this was a regular occurrence when we were kids.
Question: What card was your “Joe Shlabotnik” when you were young? Did you have to overpay–or trade too much–to get it?
Question: Do you collect graded cards?
Graded cards are the pissing match of collecting.
Think about it. Suppose I have a Wayne Gretzky rookie card–not graded like the one above, which sold for $94,000 earlier this month–but a nice, ungraded one. Or maybe I pulled it from a pack 30 years ago and kept it safely tucked away.
Then you get a Gretzky rookie. Continue reading “Question: Do you collect graded cards?”
2010-11 Artifacts Box Break #2
Back in March, I purchased a box of 2010-11 Artifacts. (Breakdown of that box here). It was a positive experience, and I like the look of the cards, so I decided to pick up 3 more boxes. Here are the results from the first of those 3 boxes (my 2nd box of Artifacts overall): Continue reading “2010-11 Artifacts Box Break #2”
2010-11 Pinnacle Box Break #2
A busy work wee has kept me from updating this blog lately, but I finally had some time to scan what I got in my second box of 2010-11 Pinnacle. Continue reading “2010-11 Pinnacle Box Break #2”
2011 Playoffs – Round 3 Predictions
The Final Four of Hockey. No Blackhawks. No Penguins. No Capitals. And those pesky Canucks are still around.
The number 1 seed versus the number 2 seed. It’s actually refreshing to see the top two teams in the conference finals.
Series: Vancouver Canucks (1) vs. San Jose Sharks (2).
My Prediction: Sharks UPSET in 6 games.
Comments: If you haven’t guessed by now, I really don’t want the Canucks to win. Because let’s face it: if a Canadian team won the Stanley Cup, every man, woman and child in the United States would forget that hockey ever existed. The consequences are dire.
Besides, the Sharks are long overdue for a trip to the Stanley Cup Finals.
Fancy seeing you here, Bruins and Lightning.
Series: Boston Bruins (3) vs. Tampa Bay Lightning (5).
My Prediction: Bruins win in 5 games.
Comments: Like the Sharks, the Bruins seem long overdue for a shot at The Cup, too.
And you know what would be the most awesomest thing ever? A Sharks-Bruins Stanley Cup Final where Joe Thornton is named the series MVP.
















