fleerfrankthomas
1 Total Update since April 12, 2011
about 2 years ago Update 0 comments
Earlier today, friends, you and I set upon the task of understanding -- or at least trying to understand -- this baseball card.
And once again, y'all came through, supplying insightful hypotheses and compelling questions alike. Here are some of the best.
If he is, in fact, at bat or in some sort of hovering on-deck circle, he should be wearing a batting helmet.
Even if he weren’t at-bat or about to bat, I would suggest wearing a helmet anyway because 1) he’s in space, meaning he’s liable to explode according to my knowledge of cartoon astrophysics (better make it a astronaut helmet), and 2) there’s a bomb behind his head.
- SBNation.com member 85
That didn't occur to me. If you're batting, you should wear a helmet. If you're in space, you should wear a helmet. If you're batting in space, you REALLY REALLY NEED TO WEAR A HELMET, DUDE.
That's no moon!
- Larry Granillo of Baseball Prospectus
As spoken, of course, by Obi-Wan Ken Oberkfell. (Do you have any idea how long I've been sitting on that one? Years. YEARS.)
Wait - this is space!
Dynamite won’t explode in space.
- SBNation.com member smk73
QUIET YOU
Did the White Sox ever not have their names on the backs of their uniforms? If they've always been there, why is Frank Thomas wearing a Yankees jersey?
- My friend Adam Cz.
And... yep. To recap, we're now at "one-armed 25-mile-high Frank Thomas plays for the Yankees in outer space with an exploding bat in the general vicinity of the Death Star."
The Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. Bombs were cheap, Frank was rich.
And around the same general timeframe, the world's cork supply began to dwindle. Makes sense.
But the winner, though... the winner is this guy. First, consider the numbers that are visible on this card:
35 (Thomas' uniform number)
09 (clock)
18 (clock)
92 (year on trademark)
Deep breath.
That timer actually predicted that Frank Thomas
would be 0 for 5 with 3 Ks on 9-18-92. CREEEPY.
This world-altering revelation is brought to us by Every6thDay, who at present is probably busy swordfighting an Illuminati agent on the roof of a Munich cathedral. Good luck, friend! Don't forget to parry and thrust!
Thanks once again for helping me get to the bottom of yet another baseball mystery. To keep apprised of the next Imperative Baseball Debate, please follow me on Twitter.
Together, as always, we will find the answers.
about 2 years ago Update 10 comments
Welcome to another installment of Imperative Baseball Debate, in which you and I will discuss the pressing baseball matters of our day. The questions we ask here are staggeringly important and carry with them enormous consequences. As such, the debate can sometimes become heated and even turn violent. I urge you to remember that we share the same objective: to find an answer.
In the early 1990s, the Fleer baseball card company issued a subset of cards known as "ProVisions." Aesthetically, they're among my favorite baseball cards of all time -- they were like Donruss' Diamond Kings, only instead of painting a dude just standing there, they painted him holding a baseball that was on fire, or holding a bat that was on fire, or holding a glove that was on fire. That was so 1990s of them, wasn't it?
Illustrator. "Hey, this guy is pretty good at baseball. How do I convey how neat it is via this illustration?"
Boss. "SET IT ON FIRE IMMEDIATELY"
Illustrator. "That doesn't make sense, though."
Boss. "THERE'S SO MUCH AWESOME ENERGY HAPPENING THAT THE BASEBALL JUST BURSTS INTO FLAMES"
Illustrator. "It's a fire. Fires are dangerous. People die in fires."
Boss. "YEEEEAARGH" [thrusts crotch]
Occasionally, the Fleer artist(s) would take a break from drawing baseball equipment on fire so that they could focus on their secondary passion of drawing baseball equipment that was about to explode.
This is 1992 Fleer #712, the ProVisions card that features Frank Thomas. I have so many questions.
So, to recap, this is the conclusion I draw: Frank Thomas is a 25-mile-high one-armed man from two billion years ago who is determined to explode a baseball even at cost of severe injury or death to his person.
Is this right? Have I drawn the right conclusion? Am I asking the proper questions? Help me to speculate, friends. If you have a question about this illustration that you think needs to be answered, or if you believe you can explain any of this, either leave a comment below or tweet me at @jon_bois.
Together, as always, we will find an answer.
Latest Comment
about 2 years ago - Read More