Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

The 1998 Topps Tek Thread

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

SINFULONE

Active member
Sep 26, 2008
5,691
0
I don't know why anyone is surprised Sandberg isn't in the set, he retired after '97.With so few players in the set, understandably they wanted current players in the set.
 

SINFULONE

Active member
Sep 26, 2008
5,691
0
I've noticed the '99 singles are way cheaper than '98.Too bad they didn't put an inserts in the '98 set as well.
 

RustyGreerFan

Active member
Jun 10, 2010
2,496
4
Gastonia, NC
I don't know why anyone is surprised Sandberg isn't in the set, he retired after '97.With so few players in the set, understandably they wanted current players in the set.

I don't think anyone is surprised. That's how things were back then.

And I don't think card companies care what players are in any given set as long as it's what will sell. At the time, including retired players in sets was not as prevalent as it is now. It sure took them awhile to catch on to what collectors want - hot rookies AND popular players from the past in addition to today's players.
 

SINFULONE

Active member
Sep 26, 2008
5,691
0
I don't think anyone is surprised. That's how things were back then.

And I don't think card companies care what players are in any given set as long as it's what will sell. At the time, including retired players in sets was not as prevalent as it is now. It sure took them awhile to catch on to what collectors want - hot rookies AND popular players from the past in addition to today's players.

There was a Sandberg fan on Page 2 who was curious why he wasn't in the set.

You can get a box of '99 for $85.Some '00 even went cheaper.
 

Brewer Andy

Active member
Aug 10, 2008
9,634
21
What is reasonable for the minor and semi stars in this product?$1 a card?

(I would say that sounds about right yeah but if your looking to max profit and in no hurry, I'd list all singles at $5/each just to see who really needs a certain pattern first. Then drop the rest to $1 after a few weeks. Someone who only needs a few more is likely gonna pay more than someone who still needs 50 patterns
 

SINFULONE

Active member
Sep 26, 2008
5,691
0
(I would say that sounds about right yeah but if your looking to max profit and in no hurry, I'd list all singles at $5/each just to see who really needs a certain pattern first. Then drop the rest to $1 after a few weeks. Someone who only needs a few more is likely gonna pay more than someone who still needs 50 patterns

You heard of Burbank Sports Cards?I have heard they are tough to deal, but they have a bunch of my player that are seemingly reasonable ($1 a card for minor star) that I'm thinking of scooping up if they still have them.Plus, I'd be able to combine shipping on all of them.
 

thelesquad

Well-known member
Dec 6, 2008
1,420
120
There was a Sandberg fan on Page 2 who was curious why he wasn't in the set.

You can get a box of '99 for $85.Some '00 even went cheaper.

Curiosity does not equal surprise. Yes, he retired after '97, but he was included in other '98 inserts (not a lot, but some).
 

RustyGreerFan

Active member
Jun 10, 2010
2,496
4
Gastonia, NC
Well, the kicker is the choice of players that Tek made. Guys like McCracken, Dunwoody, and Kotsay... what was their ceiling really? Meanwhile they're ignoring sure-fire HOFers like Sandberg, Rickey, and Boggs.

Yeah, minor stars for $1 is about right. I'm trying to get all the Buhners and I'm trying to do it for about a buck apiece. So I'm especially interested in lots. Burbank is a good way to go, especially if you put it together with an order for higher dollar cards because shipping is free @ $50. If you order, post when you gettem and let us know how you are doing on your set of your player. I'd also be curious to hear how the condition of the cards are because it can be so hit and miss with Tek and you can't see Burbank's cards ahead of time.
 

SINFULONE

Active member
Sep 26, 2008
5,691
0
Well, the kicker is the choice of players that Tek made. Guys like McCracken, Dunwoody, and Kotsay... what was their ceiling really? Meanwhile they're ignoring sure-fire HOFers like Sandberg, Rickey, and Boggs.

Yeah, minor stars for $1 is about right. I'm trying to get all the Buhners and I'm trying to do it for about a buck apiece. So I'm especially interested in lots. Burbank is a good way to go, especially if you put it together with an order for higher dollar cards because shipping is free @ $50. If you order, post when you gettem and let us know how you are doing on your set of your player. I'd also be curious to hear how the condition of the cards are because it can be so hit and miss with Tek and you can't see Burbank's cards ahead of time.

Could be wrong on this, but weren't Dunwoody and Kotsay high draft picks back then?Wasn't it around '96 or '97 when Bowman rookie/prospect sets took off?If so, I can understand why they would want to sprinkle a few rookies in to sell the product.

That was one of my concerns with Burbank, they didn't have scans of any of the cards I wanted.I guess they have so many cards to list they don't have the time to scan the cheaper ones.With so many cards having factory defects, some scans sure would be nice.Did not know shipping was free over $50, thanks for the heads up.
 

MansGame

Active member
Sep 25, 2009
15,324
20
Dallas, TX
If anyone cares or has some 1998 Tek cards, I'm currently in search of the following patterns for Albert Belle (#47):

2, 8, 11, 13, 15, 19, 23, 25, 27, 29, 36, 37, 40, 42, 45, 46, 47, 49, 51, 52, 53, 55, 58, 59, 64, 65, 71, 78, 79, 81, 83, 84, 85, 90
 

MansGame

Active member
Sep 25, 2009
15,324
20
Dallas, TX
Back to the convo, does anyone else think it's easier to find the even # patterns over the odd # patterns? Sounds redic but when I started collecting the patterns, nearly every one I already had was even numbered and when looking at the 34 patterns I STILL need, 22 are odd # or nearly 66%, which is 2 out of every 3!
 

DeliciousBacon

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2011
3,444
94
Warwick, RI
SINFULONE said:
Could be wrong on this, but weren't Dunwoody and Kotsay high draft picks back then?Wasn't it around '96 or '97 when Bowman rookie/prospect sets took off?If so, I can understand why they would want to sprinkle a few rookies in to sell the product.

Yup, Dunwoody was expected to be a star back then. Quinton McCracken was a Devil Ray, and 1998 was their first year, so I guess his presence makes sense (same with Travis Lee on the D'backs, although he was expected to be a star as well).
 

RustyGreerFan

Active member
Jun 10, 2010
2,496
4
Gastonia, NC
Back to the convo, does anyone else think it's easier to find the even # patterns over the odd # patterns? Sounds redic but when I started collecting the patterns, nearly every one I already had was even numbered and when looking at the 34 patterns I STILL need, 22 are odd # or nearly 66%, which is 2 out of every 3!

Nope, I haven't noticed this. I just briefly looked at the recap of our box break and it looks pretty even between evens and odds.
 

SINFULONE

Active member
Sep 26, 2008
5,691
0
Yup, Dunwoody was expected to be a star back then. Quinton McCracken was a Devil Ray, and 1998 was their first year, so I guess his presence makes sense (same with Travis Lee on the D'backs, although he was expected to be a star as well).

I thought McCracken came up as a Rockie, guess the Devil Rays took him in the expansion draft.Did the Devil Rays not have more extablished players for Topps to print cards of then?I have old Beckett's from those years, I remember Lee and Cruz Jr. cards were red hot back then.I recall the Mariners getting ripped by a lot of writers and analysts for trading him for bullpen help back then.
 

RustyGreerFan

Active member
Jun 10, 2010
2,496
4
Gastonia, NC
Pattern 39

attachment.php
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top