Set Type: Insert
Card dimensions: 2½” x 3½”
Additional Information: Distributed in packs of 2009 SP Legendary Cuts. All the cards in this set are cut autographs of deceased ballplayers. The resulting low print runs for each of the cards probably made it easy for Upper Deck to hand serial-number each on the front of the card. The print run for each of the cards in the checklist below is included in parenthesis following the player’s name.
| LC-3 LC-10 LC-14 LC-42 LC-48 LC-104 LC-115 LC-218 LC-287 LC-292 |
Dave Bancroft (15) Chuck Klein (6) Chris Short (5) Willie “Puddinhead” Jones (5) Jim Konstanty (5) Andy Seminick (19) Fred “Cy” Williams (17) Del Ennis (27) Johnny Callison (26) Richie Ashburn (24) |
Advertisements
I just noticed this Tug McGraw card on eBay:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/2009-SP-Legendary-Cuts-Tug-McGraw-CUT-AUTO-6-17-PHILLIES-METS-RIP-2004-/310389548976?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item4844a8a7b0
It says “Mets” on it, but it’s clearly half a card of Tug McGraw as a Phillie. Half a card. You could buy that full 1978 card actually signed for probably about $10-$20. Or you could buy half a card of it for $80. The fact that Upper deck did that sucks, and it is an example of the reason why I too hate Upper Deck!
From what I’ve seen, there were a lot of cards like that in the set. Given how small the print runs were for the cards, I never understood why it was so difficult for Upper Deck to just produce different cards to reflect the source material of the autograph. For index cards and other items where there is no identifying team information, it’s fine to just arbitrarily assign the team. But when there’s a piece of a card/picture that clearly shows which team the player is with, then there’s really no excuse.
You make a good point with Topps needing UD around to spur on some competition. I agree. But man, I just don’t like UD.
It would have been cool if Topps had sent them a cease-and-desist letter from using Topps cards to seal and re-sell like they did here!