We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

So, I won the 1959 A's Maris ball from Heritage. Here's what the ball likely looks like after reimaging the photo for approximated aging (assuming the ball isn't/wasn't shellacked, since none was mentioned in the listing):

I bought the story that the signature was an early Maris, but now that I look at balls from earlier in his career, the signature STILL looks off to me. Is the R too thin on top and hard on the right leg, along with the s being wrong for his style?

I also wonder how Heritage decided that the ball was 6-7 average on signatures, as the Maris looks to be borderline ungradable when balanced for age.

My doubts are increasing, since the Ray Jablonski looks wrong for the era, and the B in Bob Cerv looks a lot softer/clean/slow than I'm used to seeing. Maybe I'm just scrutinizing too much.

Views: 451

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I'm surprised that there hasn't been more input on this. I was really hoping to have some level of assurance on this, since Heritage seems to have taken a "PSA reviewed the items in person before auction" stance, while PSA has taken a "While we believe the items are authentic, we can't be certain based upon scans and recommend you submit the item for full authentication" stance. The two directly contradict each other. Coupled with the questionable fading on the Maris (relative to other signatures), I was really hoping to have some of our 50s/60s Yankees experts chime in on this.

I'm sorry but I do not know anyone that can make a determination on this maris from this poor quality signature.  I am leaning towards authentic but I really cannot make out the detail of the letters.  

Thanks Terrier. I guess that's what I was feeling. Initially, I thought the imaging was an issue, but Mike from Heritage seems to feel the imaging is accurate. Given we can't tell the autograph is authentic with the naked eye, it shouldn't grade anywhere near the 5+ range. I believe the highest grade that requires more than the naked eye would be a 3.

Beyond that, does it seem odd that the Maris is so weak compared to the surrounding signatures and the ball stamping, itself? It looks far more faded than anything around it.

While the Maris is weak, it looks legitimate for this time period and is very likely authentic in my opinion.

As to the grade, they are grading the autographs overall and I think their grade is accurate. Obviously, the Maris is probably only a 5 but overall 6.5 to 7.5 looks correct for the other autographs.

Were any autographs identified as "Clubhouse?" Often on team signed balls if only a PSA/DNA pre-certification is provided, they may well have missed some minor clubhouse guys as Maris is really the most important autograph on this ball.

None were marked clubhouse, however, I really think the Jablonski and Maris were written by the same person. I just don't know who that person is/was.

I'm confident the Maris is authentic and will authenticate by either PSA/DNA or JSA if submitted.

I have seen many early authenticated Maris autographs that match this one. No way Jablonski and Maris were signed in same hand.

Keep in mind it comes with a JSA auction house LOA and is pre-certified by PSA/DNA which means both looked at the ball in hand, not an online picture. 

Randy, I don't think the Maris would grade a 5, to be honest, but that's my personal opinion. I have a "5" Lemiuex that far bolder than the Maris. Heck, I had an Yzerman bolder than the Maris that PSA simply said they couldn't authenticate due to it being too light. In any event, if you're confident it's authentic, that's all I was looking for. Now to decide whether to submit the ball to Steve Grad or Richard Simon.

While Richard is certainly very knowledgeable and possibly better than Grad and he will charge less, if you are looking for future liquidity and value either JSA or PSA/DNA is your best bet as they carry more weight on the open market whether right or wrong.

JSA will upgrade to a full letter if you submit the Auction LOA to them within 60 days for $50 on a team signed ball plus obviously shipping both ways or catch them at a show and pay only the $50.

I found the listing on the Heritage site and it says the item comes with a JSA Auction House LOA so that is by far your best option for the authentication process from a price point.

PSA/DNA also offers a discounted rate for the Pre-certified items but probably more than $50.

This is the picture of the Maris from the auction listing. I really don't see that as grading Ex5.

EX 5: Excellent. With PSA EX 5 autographs; aging is becoming evident. The autograph, by this stage, has lost the luster of a bold autograph but it can still be deciphered with the naked eye. Smudging in a limited area of the autograph may be present along with more advanced stages of fading or skipping with possible blemishes in a few minor areas. The presentation of a PSA EX 5 autograph is still clear but the defects have begun to affect the eye-appeal in a more obvious way. In addition, a more significant retrace, though still limited to approximately 25% or less of the signature, by the original signer, may be acceptable.

VG-EX 4: Very Good-Excellent. A PSA VG-EX 4 is an autograph that may be subject to noticeable areas of advanced fading where some letters within the signature can only be deciphered under close scrutiny. Major eye-appeal issues have begun to set in, however, the autograph must still be approximately 75% visible to the naked eye. Advanced degrees of the above mentioned defects might be more noticeable with the PSA VG-EX 4 grade. In addition, a more significant retrace, though still limited to approximately 35% or less of the signature, by the original signer, may be acceptable.

Well, I can clearly decipher the autograph on the picture with my naked eye and I'm sure it it slightly better in person.

I had already looked at their standards before giving my opinion of 5. It is subjective at any rate and everyone is entitled to their own opinion but based on their standards I think a 5 is accurate for Maris and 6-7 overall on all the autographs is about right which is how they described them in their auction.

Randy, I reimaged the ball, since I have it in hand, and this was the most optimal picture I could get. There's a scratch across the loop of the "g" that wasn't disclosed in the auction, but now that I know it's there (in hand it's clear), I can see it on Heritage's photos. Without the scratch, I was could see it grade a 3/4. With the scratch, I can't see it beating a 2.

Anyway, I compiled a list of the players supposedly on the ball:

Harry Craft (manager)
Don Heffner (coach)
Bob Swift (coach)

Zeke Bella (bench player all season)
Bob Cerv (starting LF)
Joe DeMaestri (starting SS)
Ned Garver (SP)
Bob Grim (SP through May, apparently injured; RP from June)
Kent Hadley (starting 1B)
Ray Herbert (SP)
Whitey Herzog (bench player; no appearances after 14 June)
Frank House (starting C)
Ray Jablonski (starting 3B in Sept; acquired via trade mid-Aug)
Ken Johnson (September Call-Up SP; 22 Sept first game)
Jerry Lumpe (starting 2B through July; starting SS after; acquired late-May)
Roger Maris (starting RF)
Joe Morgan (bench player; acquired mid-Aug)
Russ Snyder (starting LF through mid-Aug; starting CF in Sept)
Wayne Terwilliger (starting 2B Aug)
Dick Tomanek (spot closer)
John Tsitouris (RP; spot starter)
Bill Tuttle (starting CF)
Dick Williams (starting 1B through late-April; starting 3B after)

Logically, the ball would have been signed in Sept, assuming Whitey Herzog was still on the roster at the time.

here is another '59 ball signed by Maris, with a nice, clear signature.  the loop in the M was typical in his early signatures, and disappeared around 1960.  As I stated before, I am leaning towards authentic on the Maris, but I hesitate to go further as I cannot see all of the letter formations.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service