2024 Topps Set Review

2024 Topps Set Review

I finally  picked up a 2024 Topps set.  Once again this year I opted not to try to build the set by way of purchasing packs and for the same reasons.  It would have cost me probably close to a grand to do so and that's assuming I was even able to find packs to over pay for (I'm not sure I ever saw Series 2 on shelves).

So instead, for the rather reasonable price of $47 shipped on ebay, I picked up a factory set.  I'd be lying if I said I didn't miss doing this the old fashioned way, especially in year where I really like the design, such as this one, but I'm not made of money either.  So let's dive in.

These factory sets now come in an endless variation of boxes.  I'm not sure how many, what they all mean, or what the various gimmicks inside are, and I don't really care.  So long as they include all 700 cards as this one did, that's good enough for me.  This particular one came with a cello-pack of five rookies with photo variations and as I discovered once I started sorting the cards inside, four additional rookie cards numbered 697 to 700, so each of those numbers have two players sharing a card number.  Those four rookies and the ones in the package have a different designation in the upper left on the back marking them as cards that are not part of the actual set and as just goofy extras.  Fine.  I'll take free cards, they're essentially really nice cereal box card giveaways.

 Once again this year, like every other year I believe, the cards inside were not in numerical order.  I have a system down for sorting to the point of it being muscle memory so I was able to get them in sequence fairly quickly and at this point I actually enjoy it.

Now as to the cards themselves, here some thoughts, cards I like, players I like, complaints and just general musings:

 

#300 Emanual Valdez, it's a great looking card.  Nice job Topps.  However, why is a guy with 139 career at-bats getting card #300?  These historically have been reseved for the biggest stars in the game.  I'd like to see Topps going back to reserving every card number ending in "0" for a star player, but that would require time, effort, and maybe even an appreciation for baseball cards and the people who collect them.  And it's not like they can say they don't worry about numbering anymore and it's all random, such as this next one:

 

#99 Aaron Judge, someone at Topps is willing to take 30 seconds and make sure the absolute biggest star or two get the special numbering.  They're just not willing to take 30 minutes and count off 60 or 70 stars, that may require an actual knowledge of baseball.

Something Topps still gets right, and to their endless credit, gets right year after year, is the full career stats on the back of cards.  Below are series of veterans that really highlight just how nice a feature the full stats on the back is:

 

                      

Topps, also to their credit, continues to produce nice cards for players who aren't on their way to Cooperstown (maybe a few guys below could be, but you get my point).  Here's a look at some cards that caught my eye as nice ones in the set:

 

  

The over the wall (or at least against the wall) catch has been a favorite since at least the 1989 Upper Deck Eric Young.  Maybe there were earlier examples, but that's the first one I remember going crazy for.  Here is Luis Robert getting the treatment from Topps with a great looking card:

Great as that card is, and the general idea of that card is, I think you can have too much of a good thing.  I'm not sure what exactly the number is to cross that that line, but Topps crossed it this year.  In fact, they crossed it by such a wide margin it made me long for some old staples of Topps sets that I haven't seen in awhile.  Like whatever happened to that standard yearbook style photo?  Think 1985 Gooden or 1961 Willie Mays, I actually wouldn't mind a few cards like that mixed into a set.  Not to mention photos from guys in the dugout or standing around the batting cage.  Those used to be staples.  Not as exciting as these cards below, but again, I think you can have too much of a good thing.

I give Topps pretty high marks for how they handled the standard subsets this year.  My complaints, to the extent that I have any, are complaints of ommission.  I'd like to see manager cards again, checklist, and themed All-Star cards similar to what they did from around '82-'93.  I also wouldn't mind Record Breakers and Throw Back the Clock cards making a comeback, but I don't feel as strongly about that.

 

I like the team cards.  They're more or less standard fare, but Topps clearly puts some effort into the photo selection.  My only note is I'd rather Topps printed actual checklist cards and gave us Team Leaders on the backs of these, or some other statistic.  It could be hot dogs and beers sold during the season, anything really.

 

I love "Future Stars," especially "Future Stars" with the '87 style rainbow font.  No Notes.  Same for the Rookie Cup cards like the one below.  Topps does a great job not trying to fix something that isn't broken.

 

I like these League Leaders.  Would I really like to see the tiny heads from the 60's make a comeback?  Of course, but these work fine too.  As for the MLB cards like the one below, they remind me more of 1980's Fleer than traditional Topps, but Topps also has a history of cards like this going back to '54.  I kind of like them, but like the team cards, I wish it wasn't also serving as a checklist, which I think should be a stand alone card.

The Rookie Variants: I wasn't sure if I was going to include these as I don't consider them part of the set.  But if I didn't include them, I wouldn't have anywhere to complain about all the things I don't like about them.  Below is the De La Cruz rookie.  The "real" one, as in the one you would need to obtain if you were trying to build the set (something collector's have been doing with Topps offerings for over 75 years now) is the one on the right with Elly batting.  The one on the left is, well I don't really know what it is.  It's a "variation" or "alternate photo."  Below the card number on the back, Topps clearly identifies it as not being part of the actual set.  I guess they're just a stunt for player collectors?  I find them just to be annoying.  How is a guy going to have an iconic Topps rookie card if there are multiple photos?  We lose something with these.  I say '84 Mattingly, or '75 Yount, and we can all instantly see cards.  That won't be the case for these cards in another five years, let alone 40 or 50.

Wierder still, a couple of these guys aren't even in the regular set.  How do classify that?  I came of age with the "XRC" in Traded sets, but at least those were to some extent recognized as real sets.  Asking collector's to obtain extra cards that can only be acquired 3 or so at a time by way of buying a factory set just strikes me as absurd.  

In any event, I make my peace with the basic 700 card set and don't sleep on not having all the duplicate numbered variant cards.  I also don't feel I gain anything special by having them.  They're just sort of,...there.

  

  

  

 

All in all, this is my favorite set since 2018, and in the running as my favorite design since I started collecting again back in 2008.  I love the hints of 1986 in it, and hope Topps continues to do call backs to older sets (my first impression of 2025 is it looks like 1982).  I prefer they take chances, even if they miss, its better than an endless parade of all white bordered blandness.

Thanks for reading.