Ozzie Smith bat in SCP...

[gorilla777]

Is not an '80-'82 Cardinals/Pads bat, but a '79-'80 Padres bat...big difference. I have notified SCP, but I am surprised they and the consigner did not know. I was sold the bat at one time as an '82, then saw there was no evidence of a 2 stamped on the knob upon inscpection.
I'm sure the intent has been to place it within the '82 St. Louis WS Champs Year or time frame...

[seanbaseball]

I own the bat and just sent to scp with a group of other stuff. Ill contact them to get it corrected. There was no intent on my part to deceive anyone and I don't appreciate that assumption.

[gorilla777]

There's no need to be defensive then, if you didn't have that intent. It was simply pointing out an error; relax and don't take things personally.

[seanbaseball]

There's no need to be defensive then, if you didn't have that intent. It was simply pointing out an error; relax and don't take things personally.

LOL gotcha!

[BirdsOnBat]

I have notified SCP, but I am surprised they and the consigner did not know...
I'm sure the intent has been to place it within the '82 St. Louis WS Champs Year or time frame...

It was simply pointing out an error; relax and don't take things personally.

In all fairness these 2 quotes seem mutually exclusive specifically given the use of the word intent and I would think most on here, if in err, would have a negative reaction.

[MSpecht]

Here is a past thread with numerous pics and data.

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_f...ight=ozzie+bat

Mike Jackitout7@aol.com

[Birdbats]

I don't believe the lack of a batch code necessarily means this is a 1979-80 bat. I have seen other AD bats from the '80-'82 label era, with no batch code like this one, that almost had to have been made in '81 or '82 based on the players' careers and teams. The Ozzie bat could date back as far as 1979, but I think the end range could extend to 1983 because I'm not convinced 100 percent of the bats made during that era received the batch code.

[seanbaseball]

Thanks for the reply Jeff. Sounds like the 80-82 range is in good order then!

[gorilla777]

In all fairness these 2 quotes seem mutually exclusive specifically given the use of the word intent and I would think most on here, if in err, would have a negative reaction.

I will respectively agree to disagree here and leave it at that...

[seanbaseball]

It was at least implied (no, it was actually stated) that the intent was to deceive buyers. Im a big boy and can handle the criticism although I think it was awfully premature. This was not the case and ironically the listing appears to be correct. Im assuming you will follow up with SCP with this new correct information? I shall now move on with no hard feelings.