General Forum

Ok I know some of you are saying not another thread for the storage of cards. LOL

I do realize that it is up to me but I am looking for suggestions on this collecting undertaking. I have been working on this unique PC in that I am trying to get one card for every set that has been made that shows a hockey player. So this would include, base, insert, minor league, junior, college and multi-sport cards. 

I presently have these cards in a 5000 count box but have dabbled in putting them by year so that I can look at them. I have graded cards, oversized cards card that are included in other PC's etc....

So I am looking for suggestions to store a PC of this magnitude. Binders, 5000 ct box combination of both. If in a binder how, by putting them in order that they would appear in the TCDB? Not a problem when you have only 130 pssible cards for a year, but when you are talking years that could have 1000 different sets> Ugh what to do. 

Suggestions, comments, (hey you are crazy etc.)

I would do binders by year for sure, and then binders for your different types. Put all regular sized cards togethor, oddball sized in another binder, etc. As for the slabbed cards they would have no choice but to stay in boxes I guess. But then that is just my opinion. =)

For my subtheme collections I just use scans...the actual cards are in whatever box they end up in, and eventually will sorted in numerical order by set, but that won't be until I finish scanning everything.

I like Ranford's idea of an album for each year, though as you mentioned some years would require more than one album.

And some years would require less than one page.

I would consider picking a standard binder size (3" or 4"), And figuring out how many full pages fit in one of the binders (let's say it's 100 pages). Due to the continual discovery of older sets, I would then limit to start the number of pages per binder to be 90 (to allow for expansion). Then, I would keep pages within the same year. (For example, if there are 5 sets in 1923, then that page would only hold the 5 cards. If there are 10 sets in 1924, then 2 pages are set aside for those sets. That way, if another set is discovered for 1923, all 10 1924 sets wouldn't have to "move" - not to mention the domino effect throughout all the binders, etc.)

Additionally, knowing how there are sets of varying sizes, I would allow a page for each various known size for those years with them (for example. if 1923 has the 5 sets, but one of them is 4x6, then 4 would be in the normal 9-pocket pages, and the 1 would be in a 4-pocket page, so now there would be 2 pages for 1923). Again, by only starting with 90 pages per binder, it allows for expansion if the card size for any of these sets is unknown, and then when one is obtained - surprise!

And, yes, some recent years may actually exceed the binder limitations, but then the breakout could be by set name or company, or some other method that makes you happy.

I recommend the larger binders because they do allow for more wiggle room. If you have a slew of 1" binders, what are the odds that if you can only fit 30 pages in one, if you stick to the same 10% less per binder capacity, then you're starting with 27 pages, and only have room for 3 additional ones. This may be okay, but is that a chance you wish to take? You can always expand forward (a newly discovered older set could make you grow towards the front, rather than shift everything back).

I hope you can follow that rambling. :)

Awesome idea and response

Question, how about labeling the binders?

Label them with something that can be removed and replaced easily, just in case things do get shuffled around.

If you get the "view" binders, then as is being discussed in another thread, you can print your own custom "spines", and if need be, re-do them as needed. View binders are more expensive, but if this is your definitive collection, then if I was you, I'd go for it. (They are an extra 50 cents to $1 per binder on average.)

Vrooomed is ALWAYS better!! ;) Great ideas Dan! That way you can have the multiple sheets all in one binder. I like it as well. =) As for the binders I use 2" as up here it seems the binders get STUPID in price. Staples and/or Wal-Mart are both over $10 for a 3 inch binder. UGH.

I prefer chaos.  Do pages where no two cards are from the same year, team, or player.  It makes each card stand out.  I think it's the solution to everything.

I just wanted to present an opinion from the opposing viewpoint.  Instead of finding 8 more 1993-94 cards, or Bruins cards, look for anything that isn't 1993-94 or Bruins.  Much easier, and no gaps in your binder.

That said, that was kind of how my wife "disorganized" her Steve Yzerman collection. It's pretty much in the order the cards were acquired. We were getting enough to fill a 3" binder each year (from 97-98, 98-99. 99-00, 00-01, & 01-02) with a binder full from before that, so I know that Binder #4 has nothing from 00-01 (they start in Binder #5) or later, but there might be a 90-91 in #4. That was her chosen method. (I wasn't a fan, but not mine.)

My Bobby Clarke binder is in strict year / alpha order. My Paul Coffey binder is a little different - I have pages grouped by teams. So the Oilers come first, etc.

But, those ae player collections, and not a single card from each set ever made collection.

I will be interested to see what you fnally decide to do.