A blatant error by O-Pee-Chee in their 1968-69 hockey card set was responsible for a common card becoming one of the more valuable cards in the set. The fact that O-Pee-Chee corrected the error mid-season made the card quite rare. The fact that the player was not much of a star and was probably a throw-away back in the day makes the card even more rare.
Just the facts:
- The 1968-69 Keith McCreary RC is only valuable if missing the number on the back of the card.
- Keith was twice taken in an NHL expansion draft.
- McCreary was the first ever captain of the Atlanta Flames.
- McCreary’s NHL career began in 1962 with the Montreal Canadiens.
Number 193 of the 1968-69 O-Pee-Chee set is the rookie card of Keith McCreary. McCreary played his first National Hockey League game in the 1962 Stanley Cup playoffs but didn’t become a regular in the league until the Pittsburgh Penguins picked him up in the 1967 expansion draft. Because several of the 193 card were mistakenly printed without the card number on the back, McCreary holds a place in hockey card history.
Keith played junior hockey for the Peterborough T.P.T.’s (Petes) of the OHA in 1956-57. It was the first year the franchise played in Peterborough after moving from Kitchener where they were known as the Canucks (previous to that, the Kitchener Greenshirts). In 1961-62, McCreary played his first NHL game, a single game for the Canadiens in their semi-final loss to the Chicago Black Hawks. He played nine more games with Montreal during the 1964-65 regular season.
Perhaps one his best seasons in the minors came in 1962-63 with the Hull-Ottawa Canadiens of the EPHL. Keith finished third on the team in points with 61. The team was coached by Scotty Bowman. Bowman too would get his big break with NHL expansion in 1967. Bowman’s coaching career played out with obviously much more success than McCreary’s playing career.
Keith modestly enjoyed his greatest Stanley Cup playoff success in 1969-70 with the Penguins. McCreary played ten games as Pittsburgh swept the Oakland Seals in the quarter-finals before losing in six to the St. Louis Blues in the semi-finals. St. Louis moved forward to be swept by the Boston Bruins in the Stanley Cup finals.
Once more a victim of expansion, McCreary was picked up by the Atlanta Flames in the 1972 expansion draft as the Flames and New York Islanders entered the league. Keith played three years with the Flames, serving as the club’s first team captain during his time in Atlanta, before retiring from the game after the 1974-75 season.
In total, McCreary played 532 regular season NHL games. Unfortunately, he passed away in 2003 after a battle with cancer.
The rare 1968-69 O-Pee-Chee Keith McCreary rookie card with no number on the back is valued at $40 by Beckett Hockey Monthly. The corrected card is valued as a common card, as are all McCreary hockey cards that followed.
Could you please post images of the backs for this card. I’m not totally convinced that one of them exists.
Perhaps some of the early price guide editors made a mistake and people have just accepted it over the years? Remember that the Gordie Howe “Mr. Hockey” card from the year after has the same number (and also an unnumbered version).
Thoughts?
I hear ya, Stephen. I wrote this article then went looking for pictures because I don’t own the card. I couldn’t find many backs at all, number or not. I published the article anyone but deep down, I knew someone was going to call me on it! I’m going to do a little more searching – forums, vendors, etc. – maybe you’re right and they don’t really exist! Kind of like the search for Sasquatch…
Not an answer to the question yet but this is an interesting forum discussion about the card from a few years ago. http://bit.ly/JihjGx As for the whole back being blank (which someone suggested), I grew up in London and had a friend who had an uncle that worked for O-Pee-Chee – we used to get sheets of cards with blank backs all the time from him…
I just checked my copy of the card and it has the number on it.
There is one on eBay right now, claiming to be the ‘very rare’ 1968-69 McCreary card. It doesn’t show the back or say anything about it. I’ve messaged him – hopefully will get a response.
That thread pretty much sums it up. In my opinion, a blank back is much different that a missing number. “Proofs” show up all the time, but I think it was just laziness or confusion on Beckett’s part when they decided that a NNO version would be listed. I think it is safe to say that it just doesn’t exist.
Comments are closed.