And Now Your 2008 San Francisco Giants....

I tuned into the Brian Sabean show last night with KNBR host Ralph "the Razor" Barbieri and it was ho-hum fu. I realize that Sabean can only do so much with someone else in control of the purse-strings, but his answers are so rehearsed that the show has very little to offer.

And because I am a San Francisco Giants' fan I will endure the bushwah for as long as it takes the Gigantes to win the whole enchilada. And it might just be like what had to happen to some Boston Red Sox old-timer fans who passed away moments after the ball off Mookie Wilson's bat found its way through Bill Buckner's legs. My memory of the Giants coming close will be that of Reggie Sanders letting the attack of the foam fingers get the best of him on a ball hit by Scott Spiezio that I will forever think the athletic Sanders should have caught!

So rather than rambling on mindlessly I will refer to the Stevie Wonder composition off of his Fulfillingness' First Finale album of 1974. On this disc was a song entitled You Haven't Done Nothing which best describes the San Francisco Giants' front office, once Jeff Kent split the scene for smoggy Chavez Ravine.

We are amazed but not amused
By all the things you say that you'll do
Though much concerned but not involved
with decisions that are made by you.

But we are sick and tired of hearing your song
Telling how you are going to change right from wrong
'cause if you really want to hear our views
"You haven't done nothing!"

It's not too cool to be ridiculed
But you brought this upon yourself
The world is tired of pacifiers
We want the truth and nothing else.

And we are sick and tired of hearing your song
Telling how you are going to change right from wrong
'cause if you really want to hear our views
"You haven't done nothing!"

We would not care to wake up to the nightmare
that's becoming real life
but when misled who knows a person's mind
can turn as cold as ice?

Why do you keep on making us hear your song
telling us how you are changing right from wrong
'cause if you really want to hear our views
"YOU HAVEN'T DONE NOTHING!"


Thanks to the great Stevie Wonder. Keep the faith Giants' fans. Continue attending ballgames, at beautiful PacBell/AT&T Park, because there is always the possibility you will see a record established. Even if it is at the Giants' expense.


Kevin Marquez

Too Many Statistics Create Myths

In 1962, Bill Fischer had eleven (11) consecutive starts without issuing a single base on balls. On the surface this looks like quite a feat but after further review you discover that these numbers add up to nothing. Unfortunately, for the lifetime W-45 L-58 hurler, Fischer played for the lowly Kansas City Athletics (whose record that season was 72W 90-L) and his record during this amazing run was 2-Wins and 8-Losses. In 71-Innings pitched, he allowed 86 hits, walked none and struck out 18. He had to be a batter's dream, seeing as how he was around the plate and wasn't really fooling anybody.

Seems with statistics there's always something you can uncover if you dig long enough. And with trivial things like myths the more you delve into them the more you see how far-fetched or absurd the originator of said myth was in how he/she tried to get their point across.

With most statistical lists, there will be a name or two whose careers have dispersed into the stratus of dubiety.

Take the worst trade in major league baseball history. There are many who say the worst trade was on December 9, 1965 when the Baltimore Orioles sent well-traveled Jack Baldschun, throw-in du jour Dick Simpson and Miltiades Stergios Pappastediodis (americanized to Milt Pappas) to Cincinnati for Frank Robinson. (I remember Simpson as a throw-in along with an outfielder named Steve Whitaker who came from the Milwaukee Brewers to the San Francisco Giants for starter, Bobby Bolin. Bolin's claim to fame was in the year (1968) Bob Gibson had the 1.12 ERA, his ERA was 1.99.)

But I beg to differ.

I say the worst trade in MLB history was when the Chicago Cubs parted ways with African-American hopeful, Louis Clark Brock by dealing him to the St. Louis Cardinals for pitcher Ernie Broglio on June 15, 1964. Actually there were other players involved in this trade who are so anonymous and were the epitome of what a throw-in, player-to-be-named later stereotype was that you would win any trivia contest if you could name the others involved. (Jack Spring, Paul Toth and Lou Brock to StL for Doug Clemons, Bobby Shantz and Ernie Broglio. Shantz was a 24-game winner for the Philadelphia A's in 1952. So the grizzly veteran was the token "throw-in" du jour.)

Milt Pappas wasn't a Cy Young award winner but he was serviceable. His first major league game was on August 10, 1957, at the age of 18. On a blustery afternoon, September 24, 1971 to be exact, as a member of the Chicago Cubs, Pappas threw 9 pitches in the 4th inning, all of them for strikes. In the history of major league baseball not many pitchers (37 pitchers did it and 3 pitchers did it twice. Robert "Lefty" Grove did it on 8/23/1928 and again on 9/27/1928. Sandy Koufax did it in 1962 and 1964. Nolan Ryan did it 1968 for the Mets and 1972 for the Angels) accomplished this feat. But, as with most statistics, there will be a name or two on the list whose careers have dispersed into dubiety.

It shall be duly noted that when it came time for the Reds to trade "Gimpy" to the Atlanta Braves on June 11, 1968, the Reds acquired: Woody Woodward, Clay Carroll and Tony Cloniger. All 3 of these players were contributors to the Big Red machine years. Unlike those nobody throw-ins sent and received in both deals.
Pappas and Robinson and Brock all did their parts. But for the number of players involved I say the Lou Brock trade was the worst because the Cubs didn't get a thing. Every other team involved got value. Baltimore got MVP, Triple Crown winning, hall-of-famer Frank Robinson, Cincinnati got the aforementioned 3 players when Pappas was shipped to Atlanta and the Cardinals got hall of famer, Lou Brock.


Kevin Marquez

50 Biggest Baseball Myths

I came across 50 Biggest Baseball Myths by Brandon Toropov and in it were some curious selections.

48- Candy Cummings invented the curveball. Cummings played in 1876 and 1877 only. While tearing up the league in 1876 he fell on hard times in his last season, 1877. (In 1876 he won 16 and lost 8, while posting a 1.67 ERA. But in 1877 he won 5 and lost 14, with an ERA of 4.34. So his lifetime record was W-21 L-22) Maybe him getting credit for discovering the curveball despite having a losing record is similar to that of managers having poor playing career numbers but respectable won/loss records as a skipper.

In Wikipedia it says he left after only 19 games with the Cincinnati Redlegs to become the president of the new International Association for Professional Base Ball Players and that the Old-Timers elected him into the Hall of Fame, saying that Cummings had the strongest claim to having invented the curveball.

43- Babe Herman tripled into a triple play. Babe Herman played for the Brooklyn Robins/Dodgers. This team was dubbed as the Daffiness Boys. Sportswriter Frank Graham noted, "They were not normally of a clownish nature, and some of them were very good ballplayers, indeed, but they were overcome by the atmosphere in which they found themselves as soon as they had put on Brooklyn uniforms."

Herman was known for base-running gaffes and as a poor fielder and this lead his 1931 teammate, Fresco Thompson to observe: "He wore a glove for one reason: because it was a league custom." When informed by a local bank that someone had been impersonating him and cashing bad checks, he said, "Hit him a few fly balls. If he catches any, it ain't me."

The game in question happened on August 15, 1926 at Ebbets Field. Herman tried to stretch a double into a triple, with one out and the bases loaded. Chick Fewster, who had been on first, advanced to third base-which was already occupied by Dazzy Vance, who had started from second base but was now caught in a rundown and was lumbering back to third base. All 3 of them ended up at third base, with Herman not having watched the play in front of him, and third baseman, Eddie Taylor, tagged all 3 just to be sure of getting as many outs as possible. The slow-footed Vance had been a major contributor to this situation, but according to the rules the lead runner was entitled to the base, so umpire Beans Reardon called Fewster and Herman out. Thus, Babe Herman was said to have "doubled into a double play."

(Note: On 2 occasions in 1930-May 30 and September 15- Herman stopped to watch a home run in between running the bases and was passed by the hitter, making the home run a single.)

29- Duane Kuiper, current San Francisco Giants' broadcaster and former Cleveland Indian and SF Giant player, was the worst non-pitching home run hitter of all-time. The guy was solid on defense and a lifetime .271 hitter but only hit the one homer, off of fellow broadcaster and former Giant pitcher as well as the 1980 Cy Young Award winner with the Baltimore Orioles, Steve Stone.

I guess as a home run hitter he would have to be the worst. But as for worst hitters period, my vote goes to Ray Oyler, a member of the 1968 World Champion Detroit Tigers (he batted .135 that year, 30 points under his playing weight. Oyler's lifetime batting average was .175, in which he somehow managed to belt 15 home runs.

26- The system of hand signals to signify balls and strikes was acredited to Cy Rigler, who wanted to help out deaf outfielder, William Hoy. Albeit touching that someone would care for their fellow man the only truth is that ole Cy was known as the initiator of practicing hand signals to note balls and strikes, so that the outfielders would be able to follow the game more clearly. But as noted in Wikipedia, by the time he arrived in the majors, he discovered that the practice had become so widespread that it had preceded him. (To show you how much anyone cared about William Hoy being deaf, his nickname was Dummy.)

It appears every name on this list of 50 can be questioned as to the authenticity of the claims, further proving that the writers had a hand in most things dealing with baseball. How accurate doesn't seem to be as important as putting something in print that so intrigues its readers they spread the word-like wildfire- to others. And we all know what happens when you tell a story, the details change over the course of time(s) the story was told).

Thanks to Wikipedia and Baseball Almanac.

Kevin Marquez

Bye Bye Baby to Dodgertown

Yesterday the Los Angeles Dodgers said good-bye to their spring training grounds, known as Dodgertown, in Vero Beach, Florida. And in the words of William "Smokey" Robinson, what's so good about goodbye?

The Dodgers called Vero Beach, FL their spring training home from 1948 up to this 2008 spring season. 1948 when Gene Hermanski led the team in homers with 15 and Pee Wee Reese stole 25 bases. Their top winning pitcher that year was a fellow by the name of Rex Barney, he had 15 W's. And through the years it was always the Brooklyn Dodgers and New York Giants.

These two teams have the greatest rivalry in professional sports. When you factor in that both clubs decided to move west in the same season, thus being the Los Angeles Dodgers and the San Francisco Giants in 1958, you can see that no matter what their team strengths may or may not have been the rivalry has always been there. What could be better than that?

And as a Giants fan I may speak for many other orange and black lovers when I say the Dodgers really have been like an impacted tooth over the years. Look at the years the Dodgers took first place compared to how many times the Giants finished in first place since 1948 (the year after Jackie Robinson's breaking of the color line).

Dodgers: 1949, 1952, 1953, 1955, 1956, 1959, 1963, 1965, 1974, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1985, 1988, 1994, 1995, 2004.

Giants: 1962, 1971, 1987, 1989, 1997, 2000, 2003. (In the years 1965 thru and including 1969 the Giants finished in 2nd place.)

Another thing about the rivalry is when a team is going through a transitional phase they always have the opportunity to play spoiler against their rival foe. It makes for good competition and perhaps it is from these inspirational head-to-head battles (between the Giants and Dodgers) that a superstar may ascend from what seems like a season-filled full of games where the orange and black have fallen.


Kevin Marquez

Wild Speculation...

During today's Giants TV broadcast, Jon Miller just mentioned that the Giants stole 24 bases over the first 18 games of Spring Training. Extrapolated out to a whole season, that'd be 216 steals. The Mets stole the most in the majors last year (200). The Giants stole 119.

Out of Left Field Question: lots of folks have suggested that maybe the Giants ought to get 1B Richie Sexon from the Mariners to improve our well-documented projected lack of hitting. Tempering that line of thought, however is the reality that 1) Sexon is on the decline and 2) we'd probably have to pay way too steep a price to get him.

Well, what about instead trading for the Nationals' 1B Nick Johnson? I think there's no way Johnson replaces Dmitri Young after the season Young had for the Nationals last year. And Johnson has way more upside than Sexon, and he's four years younger, to boot (29 vs. 33). And the Nationals need pitching in the worst way... and we've got pitching to deal... so.... ?

Here's a good breakdown of what Johnson brings to the party....

Jose Canseco's a Canary but it's true, es verdad

Every time I see or hear Roger Clemens I think Jose Canseco isn't that bad of a guy. Hey, I never thought Barry Bonds was as bad as the media made him out to be and after reading Juiced, I feel the same about Canseco, even if he is a bit of a canary.


I will be using excerpts from Jose's first book (Juiced) as a reference since he is largely recognized as the Godfather of Steroids, used properly, I might add.


When one thinks of William Roger Clemens "Rocket," they may reflect on the 7 Cy Young Awards or the 7 times he lead the league in ERA (six in AL, one in NL) but I remember a guy who was frightened of Oakland A's right-hander, and leader of the pitching staff, Dave Stewart. How during that time it appeared that Clemens' reign on the mound was about to descend. No longer would "Rocket" dominate the way he once had.


As referred to often in Juiced, the mind is a very powerful thing; if you convince yourself that you're a great player, and you have basic ability, you're going to be a great player. Nobody has this power of positive down pat any better than Rocket.


There are some players who are protected by the system, and other players who the system abuses and takes advantage of, hanging them out to dry and turning them into scapegoats. It's disgusting the way baseball really works sometimes. Well, Roger Clemens, who made it a point to let umpires know where the good golf clubs were and and saw to it that the umpires had only the finest conditions taken care of that you might say he was one of the good ole boys in baseball for whom the powers that be protected.


From Jose's perspective, it wasn't all bad when the subject was about Rocket. Jose did say that Roger was one of the few players who never cheated on his wife. Maybe if it wasn't so easy for ballplayers, a large percentage, say 60%, of the ballplayers wouldn't cheat at all. It's just made so easy. Men= egos and libidos and those are a couple of forces hard to combat. So for Clemens to be faithful was all the more impressive.


Even though we think we've been provided with all of the information needed on the subject we must be flexible enough in our understanding of how things seem to be to accept that some reporters make stuff up. It's sort of the Enquirer mindset, where the story lines are a mixture of familiar names tied in with several confabulations that make it all sound right.


Jose claims he was created by the media. Most of them were happy to present Jose as a caricature and a clown, partly because it was what their editors wanted. And it sold papers.


A column written by Thomas Boswell, of the Washington Post, in 1988, never explained why he was singling out Jose and saying nothing about Mark McGwire, even though Mac was bigger... It was twelve (12) years after Boswell called Jose Canseco a steroid user before anyone made any serious claims in print about McGwire and steroids.


Boswell cost Canseco a million dollar endorsement with Pepsi. Others went with it.


Jose learned too late in his career about the importance of the media, not only when it came to endorsements but also when it came to negotiating a long-term contract. When you're working on building a serious long-term commitment with a team, you've got to be extremely careful about how you treat the media.


Per Jose: More reporters need to stop for a minute and keep in mind that baseball players, are just human beings. Different individuals are always going to have different opinions from day to day, or even hour to hour. At some point, you're going to say something you shouldn't have said, and then you get jumped on. I don't think you can really judge an individual on one instance. You have to know them over the course of a few years and watch how they act under different circumstances.

Reporters are always talking about objectivity and fairness, who are they kidding? The media can portray an event however they want to, positively or negatively. They have that power, that degree of control. They can make your career, if they like you, or they can destroy you.

Truth is, too many reporters and analysts don't do the homework to know what they are talking about.
(Seeing as how Jose was a player, you could say someone on the inside looking out, how can I not believe him? It's something we all have had to come to grips with because fact is there are people who play favorites and there is no getting around that fact.)

Per Jose continued... The public may assume everything they read but half the time the reporters or journalists don't do their homework. Way too often, they're basically misquoting an athlete or relying too much on opinion and emotion.

This leads me to ask a couple of questions. (1) When was it established that those elected into the Hall of Fame would be elected by writers? and (2) Why was it decided that writers would be the ones to vote?

I looked up on Wikipedia and it really doesn't say why writers were given the privilege of voting players, umpires and broadcasters into the Hall of Fame. Only that the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA), or the Veterans Committee could vote someone in. And you had to be a writer who was a member of the BBWAA for at least ten (10) years. I'll do some more digging.

Upon looking at what happened in 1936 only tells me that the BBWAA was given the authority to select 15 individuals from the 20th century and 5 from the 19th century. Voters were given free rein to decide for themselves in which group a candidate belonged, with neither group knowing the outcome of the other election.

So my two questions shall remain a mystery which is the preference of Major League Baseball.

Jose's 17 year major league career had led him to the conclusion that when a reporter/journalist uses his/her own opinion, s/he is slipping into a danger zone. (To Jose) the mark of a good reporter is not confusing one's own emotional feelings toward an athlete-or towards a race, color or creed-with the facts.

If a reporter is a racist and s/he gets free rein, they can destroy an athlete. Why doesn't someone question the ethics of writers based on their consistently prejudiced writing? Some writers don't think enough to protect themselves because that part of them that doesn't care (due to their being racist) that it leaves them exposed to blatant one-sided criticisms.

The media is notorious for misquoting individuals, especially if there's no way they think they need to get interviews because they are of the belief that their imaginations are better than the real thing. (Suppose because they are of questionable ethics they CANNOT get interviews, so they have to have an active imagination?)

Finally, per Jose...the public has to realize that the good guys in baseball aren't as perfect as the media makes them out to be - and that the bad guys aren't as bad, either.

Truth is always somewhere in between. With some writers, what they choose to write about is left to the public to make a choice about what they (the public) believe. Because the writer isn't reporting the facts accurately it's all speculation.

Some of Jose's comparisons are a bit far-fetched but you can see why he makes them.
If you're an editor at a newspaper, and you can get a souped-up computer that's faster, more reliable, and can do things the old one couldn't, of course, you're going to want that upgrade. It's the same thing for an athlete: Upgrading your physical capability is central to success in your chosen field.
The performance enhancement that can come with responsible steroid use is nothing to be dismissed. It's an opportunity, not a danger. And those who are trying to make an issue of it are speaking from ignorance.

A couple more things from the book Juiced I wanted to mention. For any other things you may have wanted to know, you can check out the book at your local library.

In the late 1980s Jose remembers a game when Drew Coble was umpiring behind the plate. On the mound for the visiting Detroit Tiger was veteran lefty, Frank Tanana. While Canseco was batting Tanana let loose with one of those big sweeping breaking balls, and it went completely around the plate. Never touched it. But Coble called it a strike. Canseco couldn't believe it.
"Drew, wasn't that pitch outside?" he asked the ump.
He paused a minute and then looked at Canseco like he should have known better than to ask.
"Son," he said. "That's a Hall of Fame pitch. A Hall of Fame pitch." In other words, he was telling Canseco that Frank Tanana was going to the Hall of Fame, and he was going to get calls like that every time, no matter how obvious it was that Canseco's questioning had validity.

So to review, in a nutshell, per Jose: Every player has been on the wrong end of an umpire's revenge. They're a tight-knit group; They demand respect, and they can make or break you on the field, the same way the media can with the public.

Finally, when I read this I put a notation on the side of my notes simply as C'mon Jose.
Jose believes the Sammy Sosa corked-bat controversy was just another instance of playing favorites. If it had been a different player, he guarantees that the umpire would have covered it up. Because umps cover that sort of thing up all the time, IF they like the player.

If Jose leaves his feelings on Sammy Sosa out of the book his book is 100% accurate and believable. But because he thinks the Sammy "I use my practice bat to hit homers for the fans in batting practice and must've forgot" incident was made into an international story because Sammy wasn't an untouchable, of Cal Ripken proportions, it makes me wonder if Jose Canseco isn't just Jose Canary and the book comes out just like the National Enquirer, with all of its confabulations.

Kevin Marquez

Baseball Cards

About the age of 5, which is kindergarten in school years, I took on the hobby of collecting baseball cards. It was intriguing how the flow of cards worked. By that I mean, where I lived seemed to spend time on the sets with the lower numbers -with numerous doubles- while the neighborhood where my grandparents lived (and we visited frequently) was about 200 numbers higher and had very few "doubles" for whatever reason. (Doubles were duplicates of cards you already had.)

I thought it would be interesting to go into the history of baseball cards because they were what got me so enamored with the statistical world of baseball.

From the late 1880s to the early 1910s, baseball cards were inserted into tobacco products to stimulate sales. By 1890, the American Tobacco Company dominated the cigarette market, so there was no reason to issue baseball cards, and the company phased them out.

In the years from 1909-1912, dozens of different sets were produced. T206 were extremely popular- 1 1/2" by 2 5/8" color lithographed and the 5" by 8" Turkey Red brand also known as the T-3 set.

Baseball cards have been issued in conjuncton with such diverse products as caramel, chocolate, cookies, Cracker Jacks, magazines, ice cream, milk, soft drinks, tea, meat products, dog food, potato chips, cereal, Jell-O, beef jerky, snack cakes and macaroni.

Bowman Gum Company, formerly known as Gum Inc., produced baseball card sets from 1948-1955. In 1951, Topps began producing cards. Over the next 5 years the two companies competed until 1956. In 1956, only Topps remained.

In 1989, Topps released a set of cards using the Bowman name.

A baseball card's value is dependent on market demand. card's condition, scarcity, age = important factors
Rookie cards, or the first cards issued for a player that depict him as a major leaguer, is the hottest segment in hobby today. (In 1990, a Nolan Ryan rookie card was valued at $1,100; Rod Carew rookie card at $350; Roberto Clemente rookie card at $1000 and Robin Yount rookie card @ $150.)

Money magazine rated baseball cards among the best investments of the 1980s.

Baseball card glossary:

Airbrushing: an artist's technique in which logos on uniforms or hats are altered or eliminated. Baseball card companies use airbrushing to depict a player with his current team if they do not have a photo showing him with that team.

Blanket: An early 20th century collectible consisting of a square piece of felt depicting a baseball player. Most popular are 5" by 5" B-18 "blankets" from 1914.

Blister pack: A blister pack is a method of card packaging in which cards are packaged in hard plastic on a cardboard backing, with 3 or 4 pockets of cards. Issued by Donruss (1987-present).

Boxed sets: These are sets produced by one of the major card companies usually in conjunction with business, such as K-Mart or Walgreens. Boxed sets usually contain fewer than 60 cards, most of which are star players. They retailed from $2 - 4 dollars.

Brick: A "brick" of cards is any grouping of cards with similar characteristics, such as a 100-card brick of 1975 Topps cards. Bricks usually contain common cards.

Cello Pack: A package of about 30 cards wrapped in a printed cellophane wrapper that allows you to see the top and bottom cards. There are usually 24 cello packs to a cello box. 16 cello boxes to a cello case. Cello packs retailed between .70 and .80 cents. Issued by Topps, Fleer and Donruss.

Coin-Topps 1988 coin set.

Common card: A card which carries no premium value in a set. "Common" is a blunt way of saying the player depicted is not a star.

Drakes: Ohio-based bakery which made baseball cards in the 1950s. And again from 1981-1988.

Error: If the error is corrected, it is called a variation card.

Fleer: Baseball card manufacturer (1959-1963, 1981 to present)

Food Issue: A set of cards or related memorabilia which was issued in conjunction with a food product, such as Post cereal or Hostess snack cakes.

Goudey: Manufactured cards from 1933-1936, 1938 and 1941.

Jell-O: Cards sold as premiums with Jell-O packages (1962-1963).

Key cards: The most important (valuable) cards in a set, such as the Mickey Mantle card, a "key" card in the 1952 Topps set.

Last card: The final regular card issued for a player, such as Hank Aaron's last card in the 1976 Topps set.

Rare: Difficult to obtain and limited in number. See SCARCE.

Reverse: Back of a card.

ROY: Rookie of the year

Skip Numbered: A set of cards not numbered in exact sequence. Some manufacturers have issued "skip-numbered" sets to trick collectors into buying more cards, looking for card numbers that didn't exist.
Other sets became skip-numbered when one or more players were dropped from the set at the last minute and were not replaced with another card.

Traded Set: An auxiliary set of cards issued toward the end of the season to reflect trades made after the printing of the regular set. Also called "update" sets, they may also include rookies not included in the regular set.

Wax Pack: A wax pack contains 15-17 cards. Usually 36 wax packs per wax box. 20 wax boxes per wax case.

Wrong backs: A card with the wrong back (player on the front of the card does not match the biography and stats on the back of the card).

Mint: A perfect card. Well-centered, with equal borders. Four sharp, square corners. No creases, edge dents, surface scratches, paper flaws, loss of luster, yellowing or fading, regardless of age.

Near Mint: A minor flaw will be discovered. A slightly off-center card would also fit this grade.

Excellent: Cards from 1981-present in excellent condition are valued from 20-40% of cards in mint condition. There is NO market for cards issued from 1981-present in less than excellent condition.

Very Good: Cards from 1948-1980 in very good condition are valued at 30% of cards near mint condition.

Good: Cards from 1948-1980 in good condition are valued at 15% of cards in near mint condition.

Fair: Shows excessive wear, along with damage or abuse, like thumbtack holes in or near margins, evidence of having been taped or pasted. Backs show minor added writing or missing small bits of paper, where the bicycle spoke was clipping it. Still, basically complete card.

Crease: A wrinkle caused by manufacturing process or by careless handling (bicycle spokes, perhaps?).
A crease greatly reduces the value of the card.

Gum Stain: The stain on a card caused by the gum inside the pack. A product known as "Ex-Wax" can remove gum stains and wax stains with little risk of damaging the card. Or gently rub a nylon stocking over the stain. A stained card is worth less than an unstained card.

Notching: Indentations along the edge of a card, sometimes caused by a rubber band. Also known as "edge dent."

Restored Card: A card which has its imperfections fixed long after the card was issued. A card restorer can fix corners, crease and restore gloss to the card's stock. Restored cards should be labeled clearly by the seller, and should be priced much less than unrestored cards in the same condition.

Zeenut Cards: Were produced by a San Francisco area candy company. They feature only players of the Pacific Coast League, from 1911-1938.

Milwaukee's Johnson Cookie Company (you could see the factory from the old County Stadium, in Milwaukee) Inserted Milwaukee Braves players' baseball cards into cookie boxes from 1953-1955.

An oddity in the baseball card world. There was a 1964 Washington Senators Rookie card that had Lou Piniella. In 1968, the Cleveland Indians had a rookie card with sweet Lou Piniella and Richie Scheinblum. In 1969, Piniella was on a rookie card for the one-year in existence Seattle Pilots. But some time during the 1969 season he was traded because he won the Rookie of the Year as a Kansas City Royal.

Kevin Marquez