2018 Topps Gallery, or Night of Too Few Stars

Last week, I examined a product by Panini that, while it nominally attempted to raze the spirits of dead card products and concepts, could only do so by sacrificing their own original ideas.

Today...Topps tries a similar approach.

2017 Topps Gallery was a gallant, if inadequate, attempt at bringing back a once-beloved product from yesteryear, and revitalizing it for the new generation of collectors. Design-wise, the set was impressive, though there were some hiccups in translation, as well as the low card-per-buck ratio that seems to inhabit Topps' better products these days.

For 2018, they tried again, using a similar approach. Additionally, they continued the idea of releasing it as a Walmart exclusive. Which is a novel, if flawed idea.

I bought a blaster of this today, and we're gonna see how it holds up. Not to old Gallery, but mostly to last year's. My standards aren't THAT high.

Each blaster comes with an exclusive quartet of Artists Proofs, which is such a Donruss idea that I'm surprised Donruss didn't do it first this year.

These are the artist's proofs we got: What you'll notice immediately is that, design wise, this is pretty spot on, though it's a bit more reminiscent of Donruss Diamond Kings in its static photo usage. It's also, as you'll see, very rookie-based, as Kingham and Fried are here along with Sandberg and Jones.

You'll also notice that Mayumi Seto, the artist of last year's set, is not responsible for a lot of these, as Topps credits different artists for this year's product. While that is nice, as it brings back memories of National Chicle, it also loses some of the impressive quality of Seto's work from last year, not to disparage any of these artists.

Pack 1-

Now...you'll notice that there aren't any established stars in this pack.

You can make a case for the legitimacy of Walker Buehler (which I wouldn't argue with you on), or of Michael Taylor (which I...WOULD...argue with you on), but even if Buehler is a star, he's a rookie. As is 3/4ths of this pack.

I must bring hindsight value into this: if I were to open this box in 2028, at which point the careers of all of these people may either be over or on their last legs, would I be excited? Will I feel redeemed by it? And the answer is probably no, even if Villanuena learns to hit for average, or Buehler churns out 10 more seasons like this one. Taking out established stars, and secluding most of them to short print status, ruins the case for any pack of merely base cards to stand on its own. You can argue Flagship is like that, but there I still have a chance to pull someone from my team, a fringe player that wouldn't generally be in a set like Gallery, or an insert of a star. There's a chance to pull star cards in Flagship, and...less of one here.

Now, would this have been easier if Gallery was made a set simply consisting of rookies and second-year players? Possibly. We'd know what we'd be getting into. It'd also be similar to something like 2007 Heritage '52 Rookies. Yes, Topps' exclusive license would mean they may have to pepper in either retired stars or established ones in some caliber, but it'd be a little more contextually exciting than this.

I don't know, maybe it turns around, but...this isn't a great start.

Pack 2- This is an improvement, but not by much. Smoltz and Pujols are here, as established stars and Legends, but...just that. I'm not really seeing a middle ground yet.

Good news is the art and design are better here, especially with Smoltz and Peters. I dunno, the yellow is kind of nice.

Pack 3- Again, only rookies and second-year players are here, although Matt Olson is pretty close to an established star. It's also interesting to note that both A's photos are obviously Photo Day shots that have been redone. The hell's the point of just doing artist's portraits of publicity shots? They're artists! They can add in different backgrounds, change uniforms, edit in a goddamned T-Rex or something! It doesn't need to be just the exact same as the photo, or else it spells out how lazy the decisions are!

Pack 4: Okay, this is more like it. Posey is an established star, and McGwire, while a juicing cheat, is a fringe legend. So, even with Dominic Smith there, this still makes more sense than the last few packs.

We also have, more than halfway through the box, our first insert! And it's a really cool one of Reggie Jackson as a California Angel. Yes, doing a HOF insert set is kinda low-hanging fruit, but at least these look good.

Pack 5- The best pack yet! Not only are all four legitimate stars, despite rookies, but these four would be in a pack of this product if it wasn't so rookie-oriented. Plus, the Hoskins '52 insert is pretty cool, Didi looks great, Goldy's beard is cool on here, and that's a RC of the NL ROY. So...well done, Pack 5.

Pack 6- I'll admit things have gotten better, but only slightly. All four of these cards look great, and the Soto does have some artistic license taken with the background. Bregman's is a short print...and while I'll save my rant about short-printing stars for the hell of it for another day, the Bregman does look pretty cool.

Pack 7-
We finish with another rookie, some really cool Donaldson and Story cards, and a Sandberg that sort of counts as a double. A ho-hum finish to a ho-hum box.

So...guys, that was pretty underwhelming. Not just the box, but the set as well. It's a step-backward from the 2017 set...which was itself a step-backward from the entire 00's Gallery run. Aside from a nice design and decent inserts, the player selection for the base set is horrible, giving showcases to rookies that don't really need to be here, and shoving several established stars to short print status. And yes, Topps' argument is 'if they don't find base cards of stars initially, that'll get 'em to keep pulling more packs of the stuff'. Yes...OR...ALTERNATIVELY, it could have people stop buying the product altogether. Which...barring some mid-January card drought, I might.

This is a noble failure by Topps, proving once again that they would still rather sacrifice creative ideas for what works.