Night Owl Cards

If you haven't noticed, Topps seems to have this weird obsession the last few years with featuring baseball players making strange faces on their cards. I'm not sure why this is. I would imagine somebody somewhere is amused by this. And while I don't mind an occasional goofy face on cardboard, I think it's been much too frequent lately. A periodic goofy face is memorable. A rampant run of goofy faces is annoying. Topps never has figured out the definition of overkill. But I thought I would make it work for me. I'm going to find a decent assortment of goofy faces. No need to send me any cards of them as I have plenty of my own, and my project can handle only a limited number of odd facial gestures. I'm going to make a little montage with them. This is the start: It's a floating head montage of goofiness! I will be taking suggestions. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Night ...

A lot of baseball followers may complain about the respective Boston and St. Louis fan bases and the respective cities' media, but I think what they're really saying about this upcoming World Series is this: "This just happened." People, now more than ever, want something new. They want to be interested, intrigued. They want to be constantly stimulated. A Red Sox-Cardinals World Series does not do that. Look at the two players celebrating on this card. They're both still on the team! It's from last year! Granted, Jason Motte's out for the season, but there are two people who were on the 1988 World Series champion Dodgers team who are DEAD. How is that fair? Yes, "fairness" enters into the equation, too. "What about my team?" lies under the surface of "this just happened," which lies under the surface of "those Red Sox and Cardinals fans are so smug." I can only imagine if the Yankees and Dodgers were fac...

It's the postseason. Here is hoping that a Dodger is lifting his right arm victoriously while he trots toward first base at some point in this agonizing NLCS. (How come it's never the left arm?) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Night card binder candidates: Alex Gonzalez, 2004 Topps, #730; David Freese, 2012 Topps Heritage, #147; Mike Napoli, 2012 Heritage, #146; Kirk Gibson, 1989 Upper Deck, #666 Do they make the binder?: Gibson's a former Awesome Night Card subject and already in the binder. And the other three cards join him.

A couple of weeks ago, I went on a rant about the new Topps Heritage High Numbers set, a hunk of 100 cards that comes equipped with an autograph and sticker shock. Quantities are limited and there may be plenty left or none left. I don't know. I don't care. Topps' swift move has pretty much turned me off to modern cards, except for sampling here and there. And except for getting the Dodgers in every current set I can find. So, the way around shelling out 100 bucks for Heritage High Numbers, just for a handful of Dodgers, is to find a team break. I found one . And I'll be getting my Dodgers. But there are lots of good teams left in the break that Padrographs is holding. And you know you want the cards. Stick it to Topps! Don't give up all that cash for their lousy money grab, but get the cards you want! And it'll cost you less than 10 bucks. OK, the Ackley card is here for a two-fold reason. Pimp a break, and continue yet another regular series here...

(Today is "No Beard Day." I'm not making this up . Holding "No Beard Day" during the baseball postseason is probably not the greatest timing. But it's a perfect time for Cardboard Appreciation! So this is the 162nd in a series. Hold on to your dome cozies): You may have heard the news from Topps yesterday about a new Heritage High Numbers/Update/Traded set for 2012. Sounds exciting, right? It's been awhile since Topps did this. Last time was 2008, I think. Maybe 2009. The years run together at my age. But, silly me, I left out the good stuff. The Heritage High Numbers/Update/Traded set this time is an online exclusive thingy, through Topps' online exclusive vehicle, which shall go nameless. It is also just shy of $100. For 100 cards. "But," Topps says. "It includes an autograph." Well, that changes everything doesn't it? Here was my official reaction to this news, after reading Topps' rationalizations and a ...

Every year at this time, I kind of wander aimlessly through the card aisle. I never have very much money between August and December. That fact, combined with the tail end of the card collecting season, leaves me uninspired when purchasing new product. Mostly, I turn toward vintage and team-set efforts at this time. But there's always a part of me that MUST have something to rip periodically. Despite my aimlessness, I manage to find something each year at this time that piques my interest that didn't necessarily interest me the first time around. This year it's Topps Heritage blister packs. Yeah, I'm a sucker for the black borders. I've grabbed a few, not too many. But it's re-ignited my interest in the overall Heritage set. I know I disparaged 2012 Heritage when it first came out because I'm not crazy about the 1963 Topps design. But here's the thing: when you stack it up against what else is out there -- Topps base (uninspired design on super-...

Tonight, yet another tired "Subway Series" game will take place, weather permitting. This one is being billed as a pitcher's duel between the Mets' R.A. Dickey and the Yankees' CC Sabathia. You know how that goes. It'll probably end up being a 13-12 fiasco, lasting five hours, and I'll be cursing the TV screen as I wait for a game story to put in the paper. This is why I never pay attention to talk radio and treat 90 percent of what passes for programming on ESPN as filler. All it is is blather promoted as "insight" by "experts," when in fact only about 5 percent of the talking heads have something to say that is both insightful and interesting. So, pitcher's duel, no pitcher's duel, it doesn't matter. I'll be paying attention -- as much as I can anyway -- and actually rooting for a Met. This doesn't happen a lot, but it is happening more often. R.A. Dickey can take most of the credit. There are a lot of...

As the resident hater of Gypsy Queen, I suppose people are waiting for me to fall off the wagon and announce that I've purchased two cases of GQ because I confess I just love the stuff so much ! It's so BEAUTIFUL. Well, first, I don't hate any set. Hate is too strong a word for cards. Except 1992 Donruss. Sorry, '92 D, I really, really, really hate you. Burn in the ground you disgusting, putrid, vile set of horror. But everything else I measure in "like" and "dislike." Sometimes "love." I still dislike Gypsy Queen, particularly this year's version. And, no, I haven't bought any GQ since my first experience with a pack. I'm not even tempted in the card aisle. All I have to do is look at the price tag and I say to myself "$9.49 for THAT?" Yup, the chances of suddenly discovering random Gypsy Queen in my shopping cart is nil. But fool team collector that I am, I'm required to obtain cards from each and...

What's wrong with this picture? Well, if you know the history of Topps Heritage, you know that Topps tries -- or claims to try -- to pay tribute to a past Topps set by faithfully recreating that set down to the smallest detail, but while featuring current players. Usually it does a fine job. The design is faithful to the original 1963 set. The colors are relatively faithful to '63s (make a side-by-side comparison and you'll see slight differences). Card backs are faithful, too. I'm always impressed by how Topps is able to recreate the cartoons in the exact style of the cartoons from days gone by. Topps even goes to unnecessary lengths to recreate the errors that appeared in '63 and other past sets. As for the photos, Topps makes an attempt to recreate the style and look of the previous set -- going with more head shots, portraits and posing styles of the past. But there's usually something that's not quite right with the images. After all, Topps...

I received this card from Dennis at Pictures of Men . I've come into a lot of Blue Jays cards recently and he is going to be a beneficiary of that windfall as soon as I can find a post office. Cards like this Koufax-Kershaw item get some collectors' blood boiling, because the card by its nature is comparing one player with another, as if (*gasp*) they are the same. Sometimes the card is actually doing that, sometimes it isn't. In this case, it's merely saying that Kershaw led the N.L. in ERA last year and Koufax led the N.L. in ERA in 1963 -- the year to which this year's Heritage is paying tribute. But the Koufax-Kershaw comparison has been made before. And I've heard a load of people dismiss it instantly: "I don't think Kershaw is another Koufax (said with a "that's absurd" tone of voice.)" But why can't Kershaw be another Koufax? His last name starts with K. He's a Dodger. He's a pitcher. He's a tremend...