Here we are, halfway through the first wax box! I think we are going to see about a 18% rate of doubles pretty much through the box. So I guess I shouldn’t harp too much on it, but it’s just so frustrating to get as many as I have seen over th past few packs. I have started to set aside team specific doubles cards, so if there is a particular team you like (Steve, your is already started) I will hold those cards aside for a trade. I think it’s pretty cool that we just passed the halfway point of where I wanted to be for this box, I just hope the next box gives me some of the cards that I will be needing to complete the set. Lets rip this wax and see what we get:
1. Dick Ruthven – P – Cubs – I scanned this picture because it looked so incredibly awkward. I am guessing that is a screwball he just threw since that would be the motion required to get that effect. In 1985 Ruthven’s career was really taking a beating, he had been in the league since 1973 and at this point he was averaging about 5 innings a start. He posted a 4-7 record with an ERA of 4.53, his WHIP was almost 1.7. In 1986 he only logged 11 innings of work before his release. He wouldn’t make a comeback.
2. Steve Buechele – 3B – Rangers – 397 – 1985 was a rookie year for Steve, he only had 219 at bats and batted a dismal 0.219. The next year, I’m sure he was platooning at 3rd but he hit 18 homers (0.243 average) which was enough to make him into a starter. I would never classify Steve as a “great” hitter but he was good enough until the next best thing came along.
3. Ronn Reynolds – Mets – C – 649 – In January of 1986 Ronn was traded to the Phillies. If you can consider hitting 3 homers and batting 0.214 a “best” season, then Ronn had his finest season in 1986 doing just that for the Phillies. He was the thrid option after John Russell and Darren Daulton. I think we all know how that one played out.
4. Candy Maldonado – OF – Dodgers – 87 – Do you think he got teased a lot for his name Candy? I would almost prefer his real name Candido. In December of 1985 he was traded from the Dodgers to the Giants. He didn’t do a whole lot in his career up until the trade, but he made the Dodgers regret that one. In just 405 at bats he hit 18 homers and drove in 85 runs. How could theDodgers make the trade in division. WOuld you ever see that nowadays?
5. Bo Diaz – C – Reds – 639 – I remember the name just because I was following the Phillies back then and he was their starting catcher in the 82 and 83 seasons. He had a few down years in 84 and 85 but in 86 after he was traded to the Reds the previous year. He got back to his old self not quite as much poser but defenitly earning his paycheck with the numbers he put up.
6. Bill Laskey – P – Expos – 603 – He actually played for the Giants in 1986. He was traded during the postseason in October, I guess even that wasn’t early enough for Topps to put it into the set. Think about that though, how many October trades have you ever seen go down? Not too many, plus are you telling me that Topps couldn’t get one picture of him in a Giants jersey in the 4 months they had to get the next set out? The reason I said nothing about Laskey in 1986 was because he pitched just 27 innings and none of them were good ones.
7. Mets Leaders – 126 – Here is an English question, would it be Met’s Leaders or Mets Leaders. Sad that I am having an internal debate on that one. I picked this one to scan because they had Mookie on the card. Wouldn’t it make more sense to put Gooden on the card since he was essentially the face of the team back then. It might be because Mookie had been on the team the longest. If that’s the case, that’s lame. By the way Hernandez ruled the batting and Dr. K ruled the pitching.
8. Chris Pittaro – Tigers – 3B/2B – 393 – Ooooh the dreaded slashed positions. You know he is not going to be good, but I’ll check his stats anyways. In 1986 he played on the TWINS and only had 21 at bats with just 2 hits, so not a whole lot to talk about here. Interesting there is an error on the back of this card. They got his stat wrong. It says he had 1 career homer, in reality he had one career triple. With a little research it happened on Monday, April 22, 1985. That would be the only triple or homer in his career. So this would be an UER card. Fat chance that Beckett would even take note of it. I need to track this guy down and find out if he hit one or not. If anyone knows him give him my email so I can know for sure. Yep that’s a big L on my head for loser!
9. Mike Scioscia – C – Dodgers – 468 – Finally one player I remember well. Wouldn’t it be great if they used his last name in the National Spelling Bee, would anyone get it right? Spell Scioscia. Can you use it in a sentence . . . He wasn’t really known for his offensive prowess, it was more of a game manager kind of thing. He was what you would call in fantasy baseball a $1 catcher. Pick him up with the last available roster slot and hope he doesn’t bring your team down.
10. Gary Woods – OF – Cubs – 611 – Just so we set the record straight here, he was released in March of 1985. He never signed another contract after that. What made Topps want to put him in this set?I have to think this was one of those cards needed to pump the set up to 792. This doesn’t happen today (even in the humongous UD set). So now we know officially there were definite filler cards.
11. Bill Stein – 1B/3B – Rangers – 371 – Hey it’s that guy from the game show, you know Win B . . . whoops wrong guy. Bill was a long time major leaguer, but he didn’t play in 1985. Now I can cut some slack to Topps because he was granted free agency in November 1985, I would put him in the set too, figuring he would sign somewhere. He was 38 which isn’t the end of the line for guys like him. Solid hitter, batting average wasn’t going to hurt you and didn’t mind coming off the bench.
12. Astros Leaders – 186 – Jose Cruz is on the front Bill Doran and Mike Scott ruled the back. Nolan (whose card we haven’t seen yet) had 205 strikeouts, Glenn Davis (also MIA) had 20 homers, which had to be one of his lower outputs.
13. Pete O’Brien – 1B – Rangers – 328 – I remeber him, I thought he was going to have a great career, he was a nice combination of power, and contact hitting. He had 18 homers in 1984, 22 in 85 so I figured 1986 would be even better. I don’t think it was better but it was definitely his best year, he had 23 homers and hit a 0.292 average. This wouldn’t be his last good year . . .
14. Chuck Cottier – Manager – Mariners – Double, reviewed in pack 17.
15. Tom Herr – NL All Star – 702 – Double, reviewed in pack 17.
I really don’t mind the doubles but do they have to be from the pack right next to the one I’m opening? It’s just frustrating is all. Not a good pack, in fact I would rate this the worst pack I have opened so far. The only “star” in here is Scoscia and he’s marginal at best. My rating . . . 0.5 stars, I don’t have the heart to rate it lower than that. As we push on to the bottom half of the box, I will be curious about how the seeding will be, will we still be around the 18% mark or will the doubles go down? Stay tuned . . .
February 27, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Re: the Gooden vs. Mookie on the Mets Leaders card, I think Topps policy for the mid-80s was to put the “dean” of the team on the team leaders card. So the fact that Mookie had been with the team the longest is why he’s on the card.
Oh, and I think Mets Leaders without an apostrophe is more grammatically correct.
February 27, 2008 at 11:29 pm
I started ripping packs of 1989 Score last night. I didn’t get a double until my 5th pack, and then they just seemed to start raining doubles. I don’t think I’ve hit any triples yet though, 14 packs into the box.
February 28, 2008 at 3:18 am
Shouldn’t be it Mets’ Leaders?
February 28, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I agree with Kevin. I think the following summarizes the rules on apostrophes (without resorting to some grammar book):
1. Use an apostrophe only when showing possession or in a contraction.
2. When an apostrophe is used for possession, it goes before the “s” unless the “s” is part of a plural.
Therefore, if you’re talking about the leaders that belong to the New York Mets, since “Mets” is plural, I believe it would be “Mets’ Leaders”.
Thanks for bringing this up. This is a pet peeve of mine on billboards, church bulletins, newsletters, etc. that wastes far too much of my attention that could be taken up with productive matters. Let’s (contraction) just call this Mike’s Rant (singular possessive).
By the way….if Willie Randolph played now, he’d probably have bulked up a little and turned on a few more inside fastballs to try to hit 10-12 (or more) homers a year. Otherwise, you’re right: he’d be a more athletic and better fielding version of David Eckstein.
February 28, 2008 at 6:00 pm
So we are in agreement it should be Mets’
There were so many 15-20 homer guys in the 80s were were considered stars. That’s why you remember the guys who hit 30 or more (Ripken, Fielder, Canseco, Murray, ect…) because everyone else was so mediocre in comparison to today’s athlete. Also baseball was more of a fraternity back then, once you were in, you were in. There are very few guys who never played again after horrible seasons. Today, I’m not so sure. If rookie A comes up and has an OK season, but his next year he is awful, chances are he won’t be playing for his team too long. Case in point Carlos Quentin. He was supposed to be an above average hitter. WHen he got to the pros he didn’t perform as well as they expected. He got demoted then traded. Back in the 80s he could have milked his team for a few years like that.