Thursday, September 10, 2009

I guess it's a good time--

--to mention that if you notice any cards I've missed in this collection, please let me know! I've spent countless hours pouring over every checklist I've been able to find to make sure I have the most complete collection of regular issue Topps Angels cards possible, but sometimes I miss things.

Heck, it was just earlier this year that I found out about the 2002 Topps Coaches' Collection Relic card of Don Baylor. Sure the main picture may be of him in a Cubs uniform, but the inset pic of him as a player features his 1977 card as an Angel. So I had to get it.

I guess this is a good time to talk about what I consider to be a "regular issue Topps Angels card." Obviously, if the team listed on the card is the Anaheim/California/Los Angeles Angels, be it a base card or an insert, it's in. But I also include multi-player cards, such as league leader, combo, 'rookie star', or playoff cards (even if it's another card of us losing to the BloSox) as long as there's at least one Angels player on it. So stuff like the 1964 "Friendly Foes" card of Leon Wagner and Willie McCovey is in, as is the 1983 "Super Vet" card of Dave LaRoche (he was with the Yankmes, but the inset pic is from his days as an Angel) and the aforementioned Baylor relic card.

Again, if it looks like I've missed something, please let me know, but keep in mind that I'm only collecting the regular Topps set. I'm not looking for any Upper Deck, Stadium Club, Pristine, Fleer, Chrome, Ricky and Lucy, Triple Threads, O-Pee-Chee, Yo Mama, Heritage, or anything else. In my entire 2000+ card collection, I've made maybe seven exceptions to this rule (and all for good reason). But if there's something that fits my collection and I somehow missed it, let me know!

And as Ed and Frank often said, "Thank you for your support."

2 comments:

  1. Let me know if you need an 86 Topps Glossy Mike Witt. We may be able to work something out.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I already have the '86 Glossy Mike Witt, but thanks for checking.

    ReplyDelete