Home› Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
Options

What makes a card a Rookie Card???

TonyCTonyC Posts: 1,399 ✭✭✭
in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
This question has plagued me for ages. As the owner of a sports cards store, I constantly have to respond to customer questions/arguments/counter-arguments as to what qualifies as a player's rookie card. The worst part about it is that there is no rule written down anywhere as to what defines a rookie card.

The card companies are making it much to difficult to answer this question. Whoever had the brilliant idea to put the "Rookie Card" logo on every card ever made of players like Felix Pie and Hunter Pence must have gotten a big promotion in the marketing department, but it makes the rookie card question more confusing than it needs to be. Bowman is also making the rookie card issue more complicated by issuing multiple "sets" in every pack; Beckett only labels the green cards as true "rookies," but the other sets such as the white Draft Picks are, in some cases, the player's first real card and are part of the regular issue inserted in every pack.

Beckett makes case-by-case rulings as to what makes a rookie card that sometimes don't make sense. For instance, Kevin Youkilis has a card in both 2003 Bowman and 2003 Bowman Draft Picks. The regular Bowman card is labeled a rookie, while the Draft Picks is not labeled as anything. Meanwhile, Matsuzaka has a regular card in 2007 Topps Series II and a "Season Highlights" card in 2007 Topps Updates and Highlights, and BOTH are labeled as rookies; despite the fact that Beckett usually does not consider both the regular series and the update series to be rookies, the Updates card is a "Season Highlights" card that is actually valued more than the regular issue! Regardless, Matsuzaka's 2000 UD Ovation card, which was never labeled as a rookie but really should be, dropped from $80 to $15 in one issue! How did Dr. Beckett figure that one out?

Anyway, that is enough of me ranting. My basic question is, "What is the rule that determines what is and is not a rookie card?"
Collecting Tony Conigliaro

Comments

  • Options
    NYYanks23NYYanks23 Posts: 232 ✭
    I have often wondered the same thing. The "rookie" label on the cards does make it confusing. Hope someone on here can answer.
  • Options
    WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    It was at one time the first appearence of a player in a main stream set.

    Topps decided to say what a rookie card is now.

    To me it is a players first appearence in a main stream set.

    a set that you can pull from a pack not a boxed set.


    Hope this helps.

    Steve

    Good for you.
  • Options
    Stone193Stone193 Posts: 24,384 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The rookie card rule now is dictated to all the companies.

    I saved this from SCD - it's a bit hard to read but I'm sure ya can.

    Basically - if ya don't play in an ML game - ya can't have an RC logo on the card.

    So a prospect card is NOT an RC.

    image

    mike
    Mike
  • Options
    EstilEstil Posts: 6,977 ✭✭✭✭
    It used to be that Traded/Update cards did not count as RCs, but that was changed in the late 1980s.
    WISHLIST
    Dimes: 54S, 53P, 50P, 49S, 45D+S, 44S, 43D, 41S, 40D+S, 39D+S, 38D+S, 37D+S, 36S, 35D+S, all 16-34's
    Quarters: 52S, 47S, 46S, 40S, 39S, 38S, 37D+S, 36D+S, 35D, 34D, 32D+S
    74 Topps: 37,38,46,47,48,138,151,193,210,214,223,241,256,264,268,277,289,316,435,552,570,577,592,602,610,654,655
    1997 Finest silver: 115, 135, 139, 145, 310
    1995 Ultra Gold Medallion Sets: Golden Prospects, HR Kings, On-Base Leaders, Power Plus, RBI Kings, Rising Stars
  • Options
    Stone193Stone193 Posts: 24,384 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>It used to be that Traded/Update cards did not count as RCs, but that was changed in the late 1980s. >>

    Estil

    I recommend you copy that cut out from SCD in your "word" file for future reference.

    It spells the whole thing out - I've read it a few times and always seem to forget what it says.

    mike
    Mike
  • Options
    WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    Mike

    Won't the market dictate what will be considered a 'rookie' card though?

    Topps or whoever can say what they want, but if the market wants a players forst appearence on a card then that will be the one most sought?

    Steve
    Good for you.
  • Options
    Stone193Stone193 Posts: 24,384 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Mike

    Won't the market dictate what will be considered a 'rookie' card though?

    Topps or whoever can say what they want, but if the market wants a players forst appearence on a card then that will be the one most sought?

    Steve >>

    In practical terms - of course - Steve.

    If a prospect card comes out with a nice sig and then the guy goes on a rip when he comes to the bigs - then the prospect card will go thru the roof.

    Then - we get literal - then, a card is produced in the earliest set with the official RC logo - this is the real deal - but may pale in comparison with respect to the going tariff if someone wants the prospect card instead of the official RC.

    Shades of gray - all the way.
    mike
    Mike
  • Options
    shagrotn77shagrotn77 Posts: 5,574 ✭✭✭✭
    A rookie card is a player's first appearance in a mainstream issue, regardless of whether that issue is a Traded Set, Update Set or regular set. Take the most valuable one and you have the key rookie card.
    "My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
  • Options
    Stone193Stone193 Posts: 24,384 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>A rookie card is a player's first appearance in a mainstream issue, regardless of whether that issue is a Traded Set, Update Set or regular set. Take the most valuable one and you have the key rookie card. >>

    Are you going by the New Rookie Rules I posted above?

    Now - it's really easy - the card will have the ML Logo - if absent - it's not a rookie card. A card can come out this year - call it first - but if the guy has not played in the bigs? It's not a RC and won't have the logo.

    mike
    Mike
  • Options
    WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    I'm oldschool I don't count boxed sets. You have to be able to get the card from a pack.

    Steve
    Good for you.
  • Options
    zippyzippy Posts: 399
    A rookie card is what ever the sellers want to call it?

    How about the 1952 Topps mantle rookie

    why isn't his 1951 Bowman card a rookie card?

    Why do you never see A 1952 topps Willie mays card advertised as a rookie?

    why do you never see a 1952 Bowman Mantle advertised as a rookie?

    anyone who thinks a 2nd yr card is a rookie is a idiot
  • Options
    TheVonTheVon Posts: 2,725 ✭
    Does anybody know how PSA determines whether or not a card is considered a rookie card? I ask because I was looking at some of the new set composites for the "rookie" cards of players and noticed that there are quite a few cards from a player's first year that aren't included in the composite. Is that because they aren't considered rookie cards or is it because no one has requested that those cards be added?
  • Options
    digicatdigicat Posts: 8,551 ✭✭


    << <i>Now - it's really easy - the card will have the ML Logo - if absent - it's not a rookie card. A card can come out this year - call it first - but if the guy has not played in the bigs? It's not a RC and won't have the logo. >>



    MLB can't force hobbiests to re-define the "rookie card." The sports card industry goes way beyond what Topps and Upper Deck do or say. They just make the cards, it's the collectors who give the cards value.
    My Giants collection want list

    WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
  • Options
    kuhlmannkuhlmann Posts: 3,326 ✭✭
    hope this might help. i also dont know. i go by ebay. to me that is waht sets the market for now. who knows what the future will hold?

    here is an example of david wright.

    david wright 2001 ud prospect

    david wright 2002 bowman

    and then this a graded rookie auto. by far not the most expensive one..
  • Options
    nightcrawlernightcrawler Posts: 5,110 ✭✭
    A rookie card brings in the $$big bananas$$.
  • Options
    InMySockInMySock Posts: 243


    << <i>Does anybody know how PSA determines whether or not a card is considered a rookie card? I ask because I was looking at some of the new set composites for the "rookie" cards of players and noticed that there are quite a few cards from a player's first year that aren't included in the composite. Is that because they aren't considered rookie cards or is it because no one has requested that those cards be added? >>



    From what I understand, PSA is strickly going by what the "Big Beckett" book calls a rookie card, and they seems to be sticking to that rule pretty hard and fast.
  • Options
    dontippetdontippet Posts: 2,597 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>A rookie card is what ever the sellers want to call it?

    How about the 1952 Topps mantle rookie

    why isn't his 1951 Bowman card a rookie card?

    Why do you never see A 1952 topps Willie mays card advertised as a rookie?

    why do you never see a 1952 Bowman Mantle advertised as a rookie?

    anyone who thinks a 2nd yr card is a rookie is a idiot >>



    The 1952 Topps Mantle is not his rookie. It is more scarce, more desirable, and more valuable than his rookie, but it is not his rookie. I believe that the people that refer to the 52 as his rookie, just don't know.
    > [Click on this link to see my ebay listings.](https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=&amp;_in_kw=1&amp;_ex_kw=&amp;_sacat=0&amp;_udlo=&amp;_udhi=&amp;_ftrt=901&amp;_ftrv=1&amp;_sabdlo=&amp;_sabdhi=&amp;_samilow=&amp;_samihi=&amp;_sadis=15&amp;_stpos=61611&amp;_sargn=-1&saslc=1&amp;_salic=1&amp;_fss=1&amp;_fsradio=&LH_SpecificSeller=1&amp;_saslop=1&amp;_sasl=mygirlsthree3&amp;_sop=12&amp;_dmd=1&amp;_ipg=50&amp;_fosrp=1)
    >

    Successful transactions on the BST boards with rtimmer, coincoins, gerard, tincup, tjm965, MMR, mission16, dirtygoldman, AUandAG, deadmunny, thedutymon, leadoff4, Kid4HOF03, BRI2327, colebear, mcholke, rpcolettrane, rockdjrw, publius, quik, kalinefan, Allen, JackWESQ, CON40, Griffeyfan2430, blue227, Tiggs2012, ndleo, CDsNuts, ve3rules, doh, MurphDawg, tennessebanker, and gene1978.
  • Options
    WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    Back in the 80's before Bowman gained credibility the 52 Topps card was regarded
    as his rookie. Around 1988 or so People began calling the 51 Bowman a Rookie and
    the 52 was then designated as FTC. Many people still call the 52 Topps card mantles Topps rookie.

    IMO a rookie card is a players first appearance on a card that was nationally
    distributed and could only be bought as a premium of some sort.

    Regionals also may come into play here as well.

    The market always tells us which card is the most valuable

    Cards that came in boxed sets may very well be worth more in some
    cases but to me anyway, they are not true rookie cards.

    The debate will rage on as in some cases, notably for certain
    prewar players.

    Steve
    Good for you.
  • Options
    clydecoolidgeclydecoolidge Posts: 863 ✭
    This is why I prefer vintage. I do collect some modern, but I really don't try to find out which rookie cards are the "true" rookies, nor do I really care if the one I have is or is not the "hot" rookie card. If I have a first year card of a favorite player of mine, I'm fine with that. There's just too many damn issues to keep track of these days.
    "I've never been able to properly explain myself in this climate" -Raul Duke

    ebay i.d. clydecoolidge - Lots of vintage stars and HOFers, raw, condition fully disclosed.
  • Options
    OnlyThe10sOnlyThe10s Posts: 1,850
    And to add further gray to this...

    What about players like Jacoby Ellsbury who already has a "Rookie Card" yet, since he didnt play enough games last year to be eligibly for ROY, this year will be his "real" rookie year?

    So is last years card or this years card his rookie?

    And to the people who have mentioned the 52 Topps Mantle... I agree, this should not be branded a rookie.
  • Options
    CDsNutsCDsNuts Posts: 10,092 ✭
    With all the different sets and options for collectors to choose from, it's pretty much all semantics these days. There's really no such thing as a 'Rookie" card any more, just a player's most collectable mainstream early issue. The market decides which one is the most desirable, and it doesn't necessarily have to be the first card issued, and it can be an insert. There are no set rules and it is usually decided by the market on a per-case basis. People who try and use the same logic we used back in the 70s, 80s, and 90s (when it was clear what a player's rookie card was) and transfer that thinking today (when there are literally dozens of cards available of the same player) are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.
  • Options
    OnlyThe10sOnlyThe10s Posts: 1,850
    Lee, excellent post and good points.

    If I remember correctly, Jonathan Papelbon's "most desirable card" is still the 03 Bowman Chrome draft picks BDP-51 card and it's a "pre-rookie" if you want to look at it that way.

    Cards from his first full year sell for cheap.

    Another example is Stan Musial. Isnt his 48 Bow branded a rookie even though he had been playing for years prior?

Sign In or Register to comment.