Topps Living Set

[tdubs1010]

Somebody posted above about signed prints. I just received my 85th unique print signed back today. I can tell you as long as you put instructions on them and the player understands the paper is a little textured they normally turn out fantastic. If I knew how to put pictures in here, I would post some of mine. Still looking for a Todd Helton print... cannot believe I did not buy that one.

[astroshane]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

While I really want to see the inaugural Hall of Fame class completed, I agree Satchel with KC would be a great #700 release. The Big Train can wait for card #800 in 2025.

I have concerns about whether Topps even has a license for Walter Johnson and a few key Hall of Famers. If you look, Topps has rarely in the last 10 plus years featured him on a card. When is the last time you seen Nap Lajoie on a Topps card? When was Cy Young last in a Topps set? Has there ever been a Topps Charlie Gerringer card in the past 20 years? He's a top 100 all time player on many rankings and is basically nonexistent in Topps sets.

He, like other essential players, were not included in big releases like Topps Chrome Platinum. Their absence from a mega historical release like that is notable.

On a quick glance, other key (Top 100 ESPN) players who have either not been featured in 10 plus years or hardly ever include:

Bonds (No license for years now)
Joe Dimaggio
Rogers Hornsby
Cy Young
Tris Speaker
Nap Lajoie
Jimmie Fox
Lefty Grove
Grover Alexander
Mel Ott
Cap Anson
Hank Greenberg
Eddie Collins
Roy Campenella
Charlie Geringer
Oscar Charleston
Joe Jackson (obvious reasons)
Pete Rose (obvious reasons)

This is just a quick overview. There are other essential players as well.

I'll start believing that this set will truly be THE all-time set when we start seeing rarely featured players like CY Young and Nap Lajoie. Players like that are top 100 legends, however, very seldom appear. As a collector who wants a comprehensive historical uniform set of the best players I'm a bit worried. I hope I'm wrong but we may be left holding the bag with significant "holes" in it.

We are 700 cards in and at least 35 of the top 100 have yet to appear. Many of those 35 hardly ever appear, some haven't in over a decade.

Good luck tracking down a modern Topps release for Grover Alexander, despite him being one of the greatest pitchers of all time.

Perhaps Jarred has a connection with Topps who can give us some insight.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by astroshane

I have concerns about whether Topps even has a license for Walter Johnson and a few key Hall of Famers. If you look, Topps has rarely in the last 10 plus years featured him on a card. When is the last time you seen Nap Lajoie on a Topps card? When was Cy Young last in a Topps set? Has there ever been a Topps Charlie Gerringer card in the past 20 years? He's a top 100 all time player on many rankings and is basically nonexistent in Topps sets.

He, like other essential players, were not included in big releases like Topps Chrome Platinum. Their absence from a mega historical release like that is notable.

On a quick glance, other key (Top 100 ESPN) players who have either not been featured in 10 plus years or hardly ever include:

Bonds (No license for years now)
Joe Dimaggio
Rogers Hornsby
Cy Young
Tris Speaker
Nap Lajoie
Jimmie Fox
Lefty Grove
Grover Alexander
Mel Ott
Cap Anson
Hank Greenberg
Eddie Collins
Roy Campenella
Charlie Geringer
Oscar Charleston
Joe Jackson (obvious reasons)
Pete Rose (obvious reasons)

This is just a quick overview. There are other essential players as well.

I'll start believing that this set will truly be THE all-time set when we start seeing rarely featured players like CY Young and Nap Lajoie. Players like that are top 100 legends, however, very seldom appear. As a collector who wants a comprehensive historical uniform set of the best players I'm a bit worried. I hope I'm wrong but we may be left holding the bag with significant "holes" in it.

We are 700 cards in and at least 35 of the top 100 have yet to appear. Many of those 35 hardly ever appear, some haven't in over a decade.

Good luck tracking down a modern Topps release for Grover Alexander, despite him being one of the greatest pitchers of all time.

Perhaps Jarred has a connection with Topps who can give us some insight.

I don't pay attention to the majority of other Topps products, so I appreciate the insight, and I think you make some valid points.

I'm hoping Jared and Angel can petition Topps to work towards ironing out licensing agreements with more former players or their estates, especially those in the Hall of Fame or those that tend to appear on so many top players lists.

[MtnAg08]

I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say we actually are on a good pace for the top 100 players. We are just about to start year 7 of the set. For a set that can continue on indefinitely it makes sense to hold back some of the biggest stars for at least 10 years so that there are still big names to look forward to seeing. With the weekly print run dropping to 2 a ways back that means we are getting 104 cards a year. So 10 a year (just under 10%) would get you all 100 through 10 years. If we're missing 35 of the top 100 then that means we've gotten 65% over the first 6 years and are slightly ahead of pace to have all of them included at the 10 year mark. Since about half of those still needed don't have any license agreement with Topps it means you're technically even further ahead on the percentage of top 100 players who could currently be in the set. That being said, hopefully Topps is able to work out an agreement with everybody/their estate over the next few years so we can get all of the top 100 in eventually.

I have definitely been enjoying seeing guys like T Hunter, G Anderson, J Gonzalez, J Reyes, M. Vaughn, H. Ramirez etc. the last couple of months during the off season. Equally important as getting the HOFers represented for a fully comprehensive set is getting all those next tier down guys in too.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by MtnAg08

I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say we actually are on a good pace for the top 100 players. We are just about to start year 7 of the set. For a set that can continue on indefinitely it makes sense to hold back some of the biggest stars for at least 10 years so that there are still big names to look forward to seeing. With the weekly print run dropping to 2 a ways back that means we are getting 104 cards a year. So 10 a year (just under 10%) would get you all 100 through 10 years. If we're missing 35 of the top 100 then that means we've gotten 65% over the first 6 years and are slightly ahead of pace to have all of them included at the 10 year mark. Since about half of those still needed don't have any license agreement with Topps it means you're technically even further ahead on the percentage of top 100 players who could currently be in the set. That being said, hopefully Topps is able to work out an agreement with everybody/their estate over the next few years so we can get all of the top 100 in eventually.

I have definitely been enjoying seeing guys like T Hunter, G Anderson, J Gonzalez, J Reyes, M. Vaughn, H. Ramirez etc. the last couple of months during the off season. Equally important as getting the HOFers represented for a fully comprehensive set is getting all those next tier down guys in too.

The pace we're on definitely sets us up to receive most of the ESPN Top 100 within the next three years.

I think focusing on star players that aren't the top players of all-time is also great for the set. All the players you mentioned are fantastic additions that will never make the Hall of Fame, but are fondly remembered by fans of their era.

With Topps focus on a iconic names for the century cards, at least a few will need to be held back to make those checkpoints something to talk about.

On a random note, it looks like Angel will be getting card #700. Assuming it's a Hall of Fame member, it will be his fifth to date, and second this year. If we don't get Walter Johnson for #700, I do hope Angel will get to be the artist for his card if/when it is released. Mayumi Seto was the artist for the first three members of the inaugural class featured (Cobb, Ruth, Wagner) and Jared was the artist for Mathewson. It would be fun to see the first three artists of the set all represented in that inaugural class.

For reference, Jared has had 22 Hall of Fame members featured, and Mayumi had 57 members featured.

[astroshane]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

The pace we're on definitely sets us up to receive most of the ESPN Top 100 within the next three years.

I think focusing on star players that aren't the top players of all-time is also great for the set. All the players you mentioned are fantastic additions that will never make the Hall of Fame, but are fondly remembered by fans of their era.

With Topps focus on a iconic names for the century cards, at least a few will need to be held back to make those checkpoints something to talk about.

On a random note, it looks like Angel will be getting card #700. Assuming it's a Hall of Fame member, it will be his fifth to date, and second this year. If we don't get Walter Johnson for #700, I do hope Angel will get to be the artist for his card if/when it is released. Mayumi Seto was the artist for the first three members of the inaugural class featured (Cobb, Ruth, Wagner) and Jared was the artist for Mathewson. It would be fun to see the first three artists of the set all represented in that inaugural class.

For reference, Jared has had 22 Hall of Fame members featured, and Mayumi had 57 members featured.

I enjoy reading your breakdowns. Please keep tracking the Hall of Fame players and the breakdown by artist. My fingers are cross for Johnson. I really hope it's not Othani. It should be a retired great at this point.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by astroshane

I enjoy reading your breakdowns. Please keep tracking the Hall of Fame players and the breakdown by artist. My fingers are cross for Johnson. I really hope it's not Othani. It should be a retired great at this point.

Ohtani as a Dodger would be a bad choice. It’ll sell, but the century marks should be reserved for all-time greats.

I’m aware Trout was #200, too, which in hindsight could’ve gone to a retired Hall of Fame member.

[eldavojohn]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

Ohtani as a Dodger would be a bad choice. It’ll sell, but the century marks should be reserved for all-time greats.

Uh he could quit tomorrow and the odds are basically 100% he is recorded as "one of the all time greats" pending some scandal.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by eldavojohn

Uh he could quit tomorrow and the odds are basically 100% he is recorded as "one of the all time greats" pending some scandal.

I'm not discounting his greatness, though I can see how my statement came across in that manner.

Being that he's an active player, there will be plenty of opportunities to release his card as a Dodger during the 2024 season, and I'd prefer to have retired greats featured as the century marks of the set.

I'm sure no one is going to blink if Ohtani as a Dodger is card #700, I just think there are better options.

[eldavojohn]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

Being that he's an active player, there will be plenty of opportunities to release his card as a Dodger during the 2024 season

The only reference photo they'd have of him in dodger blue would be at his signing and I definitely would not want that for his living set card anyway.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by eldavojohn

The only reference photo they'd have of him in dodger blue would be at his signing and I definitely would not want that for his living set card anyway.

I hadn't thought of that, and I agree, that would be a terrible reference photo.

I wonder if Topps has ever used an existing image of a player, and then photoshopped the hat and/or jersey to release a Living Set card. I know they do this regularly with Topps Now. The only example I can think of is Schwarber, when he was traded from Washington to Boston in 2021, and Jared had already completed the artwork for his Living Set card. He had to change the cap to Boston before submitting the artwork, so it's the only card in the set where the jersey and hat aren't for the same team.

[twoten01]

Originally Posted by astroshane

I have concerns about whether Topps even has a license for Walter Johnson and a few key Hall of Famers. If you look, Topps has rarely in the last 10 plus years featured him on a card. When is the last time you seen Nap Lajoie on a Topps card? When was Cy Young last in a Topps set? Has there ever been a Topps Charlie Gerringer card in the past 20 years? He's a top 100 all time player on many rankings and is basically nonexistent in Topps sets.

He, like other essential players, were not included in big releases like Topps Chrome Platinum. Their absence from a mega historical release like that is notable.

On a quick glance, other key (Top 100 ESPN) players who have either not been featured in 10 plus years or hardly ever include:

Bonds (No license for years now)
Joe Dimaggio
Rogers Hornsby
Cy Young
Tris Speaker
Nap Lajoie
Jimmie Fox
Lefty Grove
Grover Alexander
Mel Ott
Cap Anson
Hank Greenberg
Eddie Collins
Roy Campenella
Charlie Geringer
Oscar Charleston
Joe Jackson (obvious reasons)
Pete Rose (obvious reasons)

This is just a quick overview. There are other essential players as well.

I'll start believing that this set will truly be THE all-time set when we start seeing rarely featured players like CY Young and Nap Lajoie. Players like that are top 100 legends, however, very seldom appear. As a collector who wants a comprehensive historical uniform set of the best players I'm a bit worried. I hope I'm wrong but we may be left holding the bag with significant "holes" in it.

We are 700 cards in and at least 35 of the top 100 have yet to appear. Many of those 35 hardly ever appear, some haven't in over a decade.

Good luck tracking down a modern Topps release for Grover Alexander, despite him being one of the greatest pitchers of all time.

Perhaps Jarred has a connection with Topps who can give us some insight.

Cy young is in 2023 Topps products but yeah any player not in the last 3-5 years of topps sets wont be in the living set anytime soon

[vthobby]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

Ohtani as a Dodger would be a bad choice. It’ll sell, but the century marks should be reserved for all-time greats.

I’m aware Trout was #200, too, which in hindsight could’ve gone to a retired Hall of Fame member.

One of the dumbest things I've ever seen on here.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by vthobby

One of the dumbest things I've ever seen on here.

To each their own.

Like I said, probably could’ve phrased it better, as I’m fully aware of Ohtani’s accomplishments and impact on the game, but there’s no doubt he’ll be featured as a Dodger this season, and I’d like the century marks to be reserved for those no longer playing.

[rlwalkre]

FYI
#699 John Smoltz, #700 Satchel Paige

[eecheerow]

Love the Smoltz, can't stand that Paige is missing "Indians" on his, and want to know where the checklist is as well.

[dream34]

Originally Posted by vthobby

One of the dumbest things I've ever seen on here.

No comprehension of context and you probably don't read any of Joliet Jake's posts. Way smarter than any of yours and always with thought and context.

Jake, I generally agree with you and get your point. Happy they went with Paige instead of a current player for #700. Oddly, Trout at #200 I was fine with as he's already clearly in the top 50 with Griffey and other top level guys and was the best player of a generation. If Ohtani, who's no doubt already a legend, doesn't play another game from tomorrow I'm not so sure he's breaking even the top 100 players of all time. I'm an Ohtani guy, like everyone else, but waiting for him at #800, #900 or #1000 would be much more appropriate to keep the prestige on the #00's

[Joliet Jake]

Topps MLB® Living Set® Card #699 - John Smoltz - PR: 2388
John Smoltz is the Atlanta Braves 31st franchise and 30th team member, and 84th Hall of Fame member featured.


Topps MLB® Living Set® Card #700 - Satchel Paige - PR: 3174
Satchel Paige is the Cleveland Guardians 23rd franchise member and Cleveland Indians 15th team member, 85th Hall of Fame member, and 8th player from 1953 Topps featured.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by eecheerow

Love the Smoltz, can't stand that Paige is missing "Indians" on his, and want to know where the checklist is as well.

I hope this isn't another issue like we had with Gibson, and having to go back to Topps to have him featured with the Grays.

Oddly enough, they have the Indians logo, so I don't understand why the name isn't included with the city, too.

Taking a quick glance at Baseball Reference, Paige played for two different Cleveland clubs in his career.

• 1931 Cleveland Cubs, Negro National League
• 1948 Cleveland Indians, American League
• 1949 Cleveland Indians, American League

My initial thought was this was an issue with clearing the use of the Cleveland Cubs name, but I know Topps was able to reach out to Bob Kendrick, President of the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum, to get approval for the Homestead Grays name and logo, so I can't imagine that would be an issue again.

However, based on the logo, I have to assume this is the 1948-49 Indians, for which there's no reason to not have the team name included on the card.

[TUAlum96]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

Topps MLB® Living Set® Card #700 - Satchel Paige
Satchel Paige is the 85th Hall of Fame member featured.

I’m excited to see Satchel in the set! It still seems like a missed opportunity not to feature him as a Kansas City Monarch (or as a member of another Negro League team, lest you think I’m entirely KC-driven). Jared or Angel, any insight as to why we haven’t seen any more Negro Leaguers since Josh Gibson?

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by dream34

No comprehension of context and you probably don't read any of Joliet Jake's posts. Way smarter than any of yours and always with thought and context.

Jake, I generally agree with you and get your point. Happy they went with Paige instead of a current player for #700. Oddly, Trout at #200 I was fine with as he's already clearly in the top 50 with Griffey and other top level guys and was the best player of a generation. If Ohtani, who's no doubt already a legend, doesn't play another game from tomorrow I'm not so sure he's breaking even the top 100 players of all time. I'm an Ohtani guy, like everyone else, but waiting for him at #800, #900 or #1000 would be much more appropriate to keep the prestige on the #00's

I appreciate the kind words.

You make a good point regarding where Trout was in 2019. I also agree with your take on Ohtani, considering we don't know how he'll come back from his most recent surgery, or what kind of success he'll have over the next decade. I think my main focus for the century cards is prioritizing known quantities (i.e. retired greats that have already cemented their status) as opposed to an active player that still has some level of variability in his remaining career, no matter what kind of insane trajectory towards greatness he's currently on.

[Fsegaud]

I think they just will not use the name INDIANS ever again on a baseball card. Pathetic in my view.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by Fsegaud

I think they just will not use the name INDIANS ever again on a baseball card. Pathetic in my view.

That would be an absurd level of historical erasure.

[eldavojohn]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

However, based on the logo, I have to assume this is the 1948-49 Indians, for which there's no reason to not have the team name included on the card.

Topps usually puts him in an STL browns uni and I'm guessing they are committed to not using that franchise name anymore:

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by eldavojohn

Topps usually puts him in an STL browns uni and I'm guessing they are committed to not using that franchise name anymore:

Thank you for the example.

To your initial point, why not feature him with another AL ball club like St. Louis or Kansas City, or speak with Bob Kendrick and NLBM and have him featured as a member of one of the many Negro League teams he played for.

It seems odd to choose the Indians, just to leave the name off the card.