Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
Options

Why i$ the 1993 $tadium Club Derek Jeter card going for big buck$?

Hello everyone. Sorry been out of the loop for awhile. Can someone please explain to me why the 1993 STADIUM CLUB DEREK JETER MURPHY card is selling for so much on ebay?

OMG $$$$ !!!!

I picked a psa 10 up 2 years ago for under 100 bucks. Is there a reason it is selling for this much now?
«1

Comments

  • TonyCTonyC Posts: 1,401 ✭✭✭
    I noticed that about a month ago as well, and I was stunned. I had the Dome sets out for sale in my store for $80, but when I realized how much they were going for on eBay, I obviously pulled them. Surprisingly, I hadn't sold one in years anyway, so it probably wouldn't have mattered.
    Collecting Tony Conigliaro
  • GoDodgersFanGoDodgersFan Posts: 1,392 ✭✭✭
    I really don't know why, but prices have been strong for PSA 9s too.
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭
    People finally realized that is his most limited true rookie card.
  • twileytwiley Posts: 1,923


    << <i>People finally realized that is his most limited true rookie card. >>



    Really? Where did you hear or read this? I don't know the exact print run on the stadium club murphy set but I would think this would be his most limited true rookie card

    Print run of only 5,000
    image

    Still the imo holy grail of Jeter rookies is the 1993 UD SP Foil RC
  • craiggercraigger Posts: 656 ✭✭
    I have 5 pcs available PSA9 if anyone is interested....
    Currently collecting all sports HOF Rookie Cards graded by PSA...for my sons Jayce & Luke.

    Successful dealings with: ChiSoxCardboard,
    lbcoach20, ShootyBabitt, cincyredlegs, pclpads, jwgators, hoopguru33, mphilking, daverat, Hallco, corvette1340, 8irvin8, Pre72, Estil, BigDaddyBowman, al032184. 1966CUDA, gwinny, samspop


  • << <i><< People finally realized that is his most limited true rookie card. >>



    Really? Where did you hear or read this? I don't know the exact print run on the stadium club murphy set but I would think this would be his most limited true rookie card

    Print run of only 5,000 >>



    The Stadium Club is the most limited from a major card manufacturer and also the toughest to get a PSA 10 on with the exception of the SP. The cards always stick together which can result in slight paper loss or transferring of ink/gloss from the cards above and below them in the set.
  • BunchOBullBunchOBull Posts: 6,188 ✭✭✭
    Yeah, of cards that feature him in a Yankees uniform, the Murphy is the most limited.
    Collector of most things Frank Thomas. www.BigHurtHOF.com
  • twileytwiley Posts: 1,923


    << <i>

    << <i><< People finally realized that is his most limited true rookie card. >>



    Really? Where did you hear or read this? I don't know the exact print run on the stadium club murphy set but I would think this would be his most limited true rookie card

    Print run of only 5,000 >>



    The Stadium Club is the most limited from a major card manufacturer and also the toughest to get a PSA 10 on with the exception of the SP. The cards always stick together which can result in slight paper loss or transferring of ink/gloss from the cards above and below them in the set. >>



    Do you know the exact print run on the Stadium Club set? Just curious. I agree cards from the 90s to now will stick together. not like the cards from the 80s and earlier. They don't stick after time like the new cards will and do.
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭
    That Little Sun card is a non-MLB issue, which makes it not a true RC. The Stadium Club Jeter RC is limited to 128,000. Making it by FAR his most limited RC.
  • CDsNutsCDsNuts Posts: 10,092
    That Little Sun card is a non-MLB issue, which makes it not a true RC. The Stadium Club Jeter RC is limited to 128,000. Making it by FAR his most limited RC.

    5,000 of each.

    image



    I wish when people made such absolute statements on this board they knew what they were talking about.

    Lee
  • otwcardsotwcards Posts: 5,291 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I wish when people made such absolute statements on this board they knew what they were talking about. >>



    Why? Too many on this board make talking out their azz and art form. Why worry about the truth, when you can pretend you know it all.

    If you don't know, don't make such absolute statements. It's fine to share information, but only do so if you know it is fact and not repeat it as fact because you THOUGHT it was true.
  • When was the 1993 Dome set released? I recall that the 1992 set was released in the off-season I think but Beckett assigned it a 1992 designation, many people were calling it a 1991 set originally based on the design. Was the 1993 set released in the same fashion, during the off-season? Would that technically make it released before any of the 1993 sets (Toppses, Pinnacle, Score, Select, UD, SP, etc)?
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭


    << <i>That Little Sun card is a non-MLB issue, which makes it not a true RC. The Stadium Club Jeter RC is limited to 128,000. Making it by FAR his most limited RC.

    5,000 of each.

    image



    I wish when people made such absolute statements on this board they knew what they were talking about.

    Lee >>



    These are not considered true rookie cards by the vast majority of collectors. Maybe to you they are, but not to the majority. Why do people have to be a-holes on here. Why not just state your point and not be a douche about it.
  • digicatdigicat Posts: 8,551 ✭✭
    I've noticed that Jeter's SP RC's have been selling for more as well. PSA 7s are around $50, which was how much PSA 8s were around a year ago. PSA 8s are nearing $100, and PSA 9s are in the mid $300s.

    Must be all the contract speculation chatter or something.
    My Giants collection want list

    WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭
    Hey, CDsNuts. I find it quite amusing that you "...wish when people made such absolute statements on this board they knew what they were talking about." and then proceed to do the EXACT SAME thing by making the "absolute statement" that there were "5000 of each" of those cards when there were 5,000 of the Rockies sets and 4,000 of the Marlins sets. Nice job, buddy. Thanks for clearing up the meaning of hypocrisy for anyone who was wondering.

    And for anyone wondering what Derek Jeter's true recognized rookie cards are, just look at the very site you are on right now.

    PSA recognized Derek Jeter rookie cards

    And Beckett...

    Beckett recognized Derek Jeter rookie cards

    Or look at basically any other hobby publication or ask anyone who has been in the hobby a long time.
  • digicatdigicat Posts: 8,551 ✭✭
    PSA follows Beckett's lead when it comes to determining what a "Rookie Card" is.

    Unfortunately, Beckett accepts MLB's 2006 re-definition of what a rookie card is, so if it a player got his first cards released in 2006 or later, only the ones that say "Rookie Card" on them will be recognized as "rookie cards."

    I don't think the hobby has totally embraced that nonsense yet, even though Beckett has.
    My Giants collection want list

    WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
  • pdub1819pdub1819 Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I have 5 pcs available PSA9 if anyone is interested.... >>



    PM sent.
  • vladguerrerovladguerrero Posts: 4,077 ✭✭✭
    i would also rather own a Topps brand Jeter RC than Upper Deck...
  • twileytwiley Posts: 1,923
    So I assume there was a write up somewhere about the stadium club recently and that is why there is a trend on the card? I mean a year ago you couldn't sell the card psa 9 for 40 bucks now all of a sudden they are over 100. I really would like to know why the card sky rocket up so fast so quick...
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭


    << <i>So I assume there was a write up somewhere about the stadium club recently and that is why there is a trend on the card? I mean a year ago you couldn't sell the card psa 9 for 40 bucks now all of a sudden they are over 100. I really would like to know why the card sky rocket up so fast so quick... >>



    There was a write-up about Jeter's RCs in Beckett a few months back. It stated that the Stadium Club is seemingly undervalued. I'm sure that has a lot to do with it.
  • BUY BUY BUY BUY...Or you might be priced out forever image
  • This almost feels like 1991 Bowman Chipper Jones all over again.

    I find it hard to believe that just now, the entire hobby is collectively waking up to the "rarity" of this card. This card has had a bunch of jumps in interest and it's been mentioned in hobby articles as a "sleeper" several times over the years. None quite like this though.

    On the subject of Jeter's true RC's, parallels don't count. Should they? Maybe, but they have never received the little RC tag in any of the books. And on that note, I'm willing to bet that Jeter's 1993 Upper Deck Gold parallel is his rarest, licensed rookie year issue.
    My Error & Variation Blog

    Collecting Robin Ventura and Matt Luke.
  • digicatdigicat Posts: 8,551 ✭✭


    << <i>i would also rather own a Topps brand Jeter RC than Upper Deck... >>



    I'm happy with my 1993 SP Jeter. With the exception of his 93 SC, all his other RC's look like crap.
    My Giants collection want list

    WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
  • twileytwiley Posts: 1,923


    << <i>

    << <i>So I assume there was a write up somewhere about the stadium club recently and that is why there is a trend on the card? I mean a year ago you couldn't sell the card psa 9 for 40 bucks now all of a sudden they are over 100. I really would like to know why the card sky rocket up so fast so quick... >>



    There was a write-up about Jeter's RCs in Beckett a few months back. It stated that the Stadium Club is seemingly undervalued. I'm sure that has a lot to do with it. >>



    Well that answers my question! Thanks! Beckett writes that then the card price spikes... Just like the 2007 topps Mantle-Bush card. When it was talked about on espn the card all of a sudden became insanely high priced.
  • digicatdigicat Posts: 8,551 ✭✭


    << <i>On the subject of Jeter's true RC's, parallels don't count. Should they? Maybe, but they have never received the little RC tag in any of the books. And on that note, I'm willing to bet that Jeter's 1993 Upper Deck Gold parallel is his rarest, licensed rookie year issue. >>



    Sometimes "most valuable", "rarest", and "rookie card" don't go together. But, I don't think it should matter, someone should collect what they want. I chose to put a 2007 Bowman Chrome Prospects Tim Lincecum AU card in my core collection of Giants rookie cards. It doesn't really matter to me that Beckett doesn't call it a RC card.




    << <i>This almost feels like 1991 Bowman Chipper Jones all over again. >>


    I think I missed that conversation, fill me in?
    My Giants collection want list

    WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25


  • << <i>

    << <i>On the subject of Jeter's true RC's, parallels don't count. Should they? Maybe, but they have never received the little RC tag in any of the books. And on that note, I'm willing to bet that Jeter's 1993 Upper Deck Gold parallel is his rarest, licensed rookie year issue. >>



    Sometimes "most valuable", "rarest", and "rookie card" don't go together. But, I don't think it should matter, someone should collect what they want. I chose to put a 2007 Bowman Chrome Prospects Tim Lincecum AU card in my core collection of Giants rookie cards. It doesn't really matter to me that Beckett doesn't call it a RC card.




    << <i>This almost feels like 1991 Bowman Chipper Jones all over again. >>


    I think I missed that conversation, fill me in? >>



    In 1998 or 1999, someone(s) started buying up all the 1991 Bowman Chipper RCs (then all of the 1991 Bowman boxes, IIRC) that showed up online. I'm almost certain that this involved a ring of people listing them and shilling them until an artificial demand was created. Then Beckett started adding up arrows to all of the key RCs in the set. This went on for a few months and I think the Chipper went to a high of $25. Even Mondesi, Javy Lopez etc were $5+ cards. I think that later on, maybe a year or two after, the guys who did this admitted so, citing it was to prove a point about Beckett and the market.

    Anyone else remember all of this hobby drama?

    Granted, 1991 Bowman is probably the least-produced RC of Chipper but not in significantly less numbers than the other 3.
    My Error & Variation Blog

    Collecting Robin Ventura and Matt Luke.
  • digicatdigicat Posts: 8,551 ✭✭
    Thanks for the info. I hadn't heard of that. In 1991, Bowman was crap. No one wanted it. However, I've noticed that PSA 10s of the keys in the set tend to sell for more than the other sets. I figured that the power of the Bowman brand name since 1992 started getting applied backwards... at least until the pop reports got bloated.
    My Giants collection want list

    WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
  • jackstrawjackstraw Posts: 3,816 ✭✭✭✭
    Why are the Rockies and Marlins Jeter not considered rookies and the 93 Stadium Club Murphy is?
    They were all boxed sets .
    If Chipper was in the 91 OPC set( I think he was but can confirme that because my SCD doesn't
    list the Canadian issue) I would put that in as his most limited rookie but there is the Desert Storm
    that was pack issued and the Tiffany that was a box set. So I dont think the Bowman is even close to his most limited
    rookie card.
    Collector Focus

    ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
  • swartz1swartz1 Posts: 4,911 ✭✭✭


    These are not considered true rookie cards by the vast majority of collectors. Maybe to you they are, but not to the majority.


    WHAT?!?


    Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
    - uncut


    Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
  • cwazzycwazzy Posts: 3,257


    << <i>On the subject of Jeter's true RC's, parallels don't count. >>



    I'm not sure I would classify the Topps Marlins and Rockies cards as parallels. Maybe it's not accurate but I consider a parallel a slightly different card that can be pulled from the same packs as the base card. Weren't the Marlins and Rockies cards distributed as full sets? And I'm 99.99999% sure that they weren't inserted into regular Topps packs.
    Chris
    My small collection
    Want List:
    '61 Topps Roy Campanella in PSA 5-7
    Cardinal T206 cards
    Adam Wainwright GU Jersey
  • twileytwiley Posts: 1,923
    The Marlins and Rockies cards were only distro'd as full sets to attendees at the new stadiums. You could not buy these at a local stores like Kmart or Wal-mart. They distro'd them at Marlin and Rockies stadium's attendees making these sets very limited and hard to obtain. That is why they are not considered a 'Base' card far as his rookies go. I asked this very question and I forget who (Cossetta or Gayle) explain this to me.
  • yankeeno7yankeeno7 Posts: 9,253 ✭✭✭
    No one here has mentioned the 1993 Upper Deck Gold. Im not a big Upper Deck fan but I do have one in PSA 9 and know the gold sets were pretty limited. If you consider the 93 UD Gold a RC, then certainly the Rockies and Marlins are in the same exact category cuz they were distributed only in set form.
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭


    << <i>The Marlins and Rockies cards were only distro'd as full sets to attendees at the new stadiums. You could not buy these at a local stores like Kmart or Wal-mart. They distro'd them at Marlin and Rockies stadium's attendees making these sets very limited and hard to obtain. That is why they are not considered a 'Base' card far as his rookies go. I asked this very question and I forget who (Cossetta or Gayle) explain this to me. >>



    Distribution is key when it comes to determining what are true rookie cards. Most people don't know this. It's certainly not an exact science, but no matter what anyone says, majority opinion rules.


  • << <i>No one here has mentioned the 1993 Upper Deck Gold. Im not a big Upper Deck fan but I do have one in PSA 9 and know the gold sets were pretty limited. If you consider the 93 UD Gold a RC, then certainly the Rockies and Marlins are in the same exact category cuz they were distributed only in set form. >>



    The UD Gold was mentioned earlier in the thread but I agree. My understanding of the PSA registry was that any rookie only included in set form was not to be included in base rookie or player sets.
  • twileytwiley Posts: 1,923


    << <i>

    << <i>No one here has mentioned the 1993 Upper Deck Gold. Im not a big Upper Deck fan but I do have one in PSA 9 and know the gold sets were pretty limited. If you consider the 93 UD Gold a RC, then certainly the Rockies and Marlins are in the same exact category cuz they were distributed only in set form. >>



    The UD Gold was mentioned earlier in the thread but I agree. My understanding of the PSA registry was that any rookie only included in set form was not to be included in base rookie or player sets. >>



    LOL! 2 years ago I was arguing on the phone with Cossetta about the 2007 Topps #40 Jeter card. The Basic topps Jeter set at the time only included the NON Mantle/Bush card which only came from factory sealed sets not Series 1 boxes. I tried to explain but I guess I couldn't explain it well enough I don't know. It since has changed (Thank you to who ever got them to fix it!) now the basic topps Jeter set is optional you can add either Mantle/Bush or Non Mantle/Bush cards to the set. I assume it all depends on the circumstance far as base cards on basic sets. To this day I still don't understand why those pain in the arse eTopps cards are considered basic cards in a base set. You can't buy them at any local Sports Card dealer or a Kmart or Wal-Mart. You only can buy them from eTopps or win them on feebay auction or someone on feebay who has one in hand.
  • digicatdigicat Posts: 8,551 ✭✭


    << <i>I'm not sure I would classify the Topps Marlins and Rockies cards as parallels. Maybe it's not accurate but I consider a parallel a slightly different card that can be pulled from the same packs as the base card. >>



    The Topps Tiffany sets from the 80s were distributed in factory sets only, but are generally considered "parallel" sets.

    Distribution has nothing to do with a card being a "parallel". All it needs to be is an intended variation of the base card.
    My Giants collection want list

    WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
  • pdub1819pdub1819 Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭✭
    Here are the rookies on the basic rookie set registry:

    1993 BOWMAN DEREK JETER
    1993 PINNACLE DEREK JETER
    1993 SCORE DEREK JETER DRAFT PICK
    1993 SELECT DEREK JETER
    1993 SP DEREK JETER FOIL
    1993 STADIUM CLUB DEREK JETER MURPHY
    1993 TOPPS DEREK JETER
    1993 UPPER DECK DEREK JETER

    There is no master rookie set on the registry. I would assume that if someone wanted to add that to the registry it would help clarify.


  • << <i>Why are the Rockies and Marlins Jeter not considered rookies and the 93 Stadium Club Murphy is?
    They were all boxed sets .
    If Chipper was in the 91 OPC set( I think he was but can confirme that because my SCD doesn't
    list the Canadian issue) I would put that in as his most limited rookie but there is the Desert Storm
    that was pack issued and the Tiffany that was a box set. So I dont think the Bowman is even close to his most limited
    rookie card. >>



    This has already been covered.

    The Marlins and Rockies sets were limited issues at their respective stadiums. The Murphy set was massively distributed and most hobby stores had them available. I agree that this sets it apart from the Bowman, Pinnacle, Score, Select, SP and Topps issues in terms of distribution, but how the collector is able to obtain a set/card and it's degree of ease in doing so, has always determined what gets an RC tag or not (parallel or xrc) in the price guides.

    It's just another outdated way of thinking in the hobby that remains unchanged because altering this "rule" would cause too much confusion. In my experience, collectors tend to pursue which ever card they like best, be it due to rarity, design, photo or a combination of things.
    My Error & Variation Blog

    Collecting Robin Ventura and Matt Luke.
  • helionauthelionaut Posts: 1,555 ✭✭
    As to the question of why, it's obvious. Derek Jeter is the greatest player in the history of baseball. He has 4 World Series championships, the Yankees team lead in hits, lots of incredible Sportscenter highlights, he's handsome and never cheated or taken PEDs. Basically, he's the greatest human being ever to live, and like Jesus or the Madonna, future generations will one day find his likeness in mold spots or toast, and blessed shall they be.

    I dunno, a decade ago this set shot from obscurity to major heat due to the Jeter and the Nomar cards once Beckett deigned to acknowledge their existence and relative scarcity. Then things settled down. Now, the hobby's contracted and turned over so much, what's old is new again. Sometimes things just catch on as the "It" card to have, and prices go crazy for a while. It's likely a temporary thing, so strike while the iron's hot if you want to cash in.
    WANTED:
    2005 Origins Old Judge Brown #/20 and Black 1/1s, 2000 Ultimate Victory Gold #/25
    2004 UD Legends Bake McBride autos & parallels, and 1974 Topps #601 PSA 9
    Rare Grady Sizemore parallels, printing plates, autographs

    Nothing on ebay
  • jackstrawjackstraw Posts: 3,816 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>As to the question of why, it's obvious. Derek Jeter is the greatest player in the history of baseball. He has 4 World Series championships, the Yankees team lead in hits, lots of incredible Sportscenter highlights, he's handsome and never cheated or taken PEDs. Basically, he's the greatest human being ever to live, and like Jesus or the Madonna, future generations will one day find his likeness in mold spots or toast, and blessed shall they be.

    I dunno, a decade ago this set shot from obscurity to major heat due to the Jeter and the Nomar cards once Beckett deigned to acknowledge their existence and relative scarcity. Then things settled down. Now, the hobby's contracted and turned over so much, what's old is new again. Sometimes things just catch on as the "It" card to have, and prices go crazy for a while. It's likely a temporary thing, so strike while the iron's hot if you want to cash in. >>



    Cough ( he has 5 World Series Rings) cough
    Collector Focus

    ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
  • DeutscherGeistDeutscherGeist Posts: 2,990 ✭✭✭✭
    Good catch on the prices.

    This card has already existed for a long time, so I understand its unusual to see a spike. I think its a combination of Jeter's continued success on the field, his contract being up and his his all around good guy reputation in the midst of many falling stars (Tiger, for example).

    This is a down economy, so anything taking off like that is impressive. The card has aged and Jeter is well established, so I believe its a nice collectible item to have that will sustain its value more or less. However, it is priced high right now and I have a feeling now is the best time to sell for a profit. If you like the card, buy it back in a year when the hype goes down. By that time, you will likely pay half the price.
    "So many of our DREAMS at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we SUMMON THE WILL they soon become INEVITABLE "- Christopher Reeve

    BST: Tennessebanker, Downtown1974, LarkinCollector, nendee
  • digicatdigicat Posts: 8,551 ✭✭


    << <i>It's just another outdated way of thinking in the hobby that remains unchanged because altering this "rule" would cause too much confusion. In my experience, collectors tend to pursue which ever card they like best, be it due to rarity, design, photo or a combination of things. >>



    The "rule" has been altered a few times in the last 21 years.

    A player's first card, if issued in an update type set from 1981 to 1988 got branded with the XRC (e.g. 1986 Fleer Update Bonds = XRC, 1987 Fleer Bonds = RC*, with the "*" signifying that the player had an XRC in the previous year).

    Beckett stopped identifying cards released between 1989 and 2000 as XRCs at some point in the 90s, so it was either an RC or not. Thus, Greg Vaughn only has one Rookie Card, 1989 Fleer Update, even though in 1990, folks "thought" that his 1989 Fleer Update card was an XRC, and his 1990 base set cards were his RC*.

    For an unknown reason, Beckett decided to bring back the XRC with the Upper Deck Prospect Premiers sets (even though they were sold in packs). So, according to Beckett, the 2001 UD Prospect Premiers card of Ryan Howard is an XRC, while his 2003 cards are his RCs.

    Now, with the new MLB "Rookie Card" policy, Beckett decided to not identify any card past 2006 as a RC, unless it has the offical MLB Rookie Card logo. Thus, Evan Longoria's 2006 Bowman Chrome rookie is not a rookie card (it's not noted as being anything) while his 2008 Bowman Chrome IS a rookie card.

    So, the confusion is alive and well. I use Beckett as a guide, not a Bible, so when it comes to my collection, I'll see what Beckett has to say, then make my own decision. In my house, Dustin Pedroia's 2002 SP Authentic USA Future Watch card is his rookie card, not his 2004 SP Prospects or his 2006 "official MLB Rookie Card" cards.
    My Giants collection want list

    WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25


  • << <i>

    << <i>It's just another outdated way of thinking in the hobby that remains unchanged because altering this "rule" would cause too much confusion. In my experience, collectors tend to pursue which ever card they like best, be it due to rarity, design, photo or a combination of things. >>



    The "rule" has been altered a few times in the last 21 years.

    A player's first card, if issued in an update type set from 1981 to 1988 got branded with the XRC (e.g. 1986 Fleer Update Bonds = XRC, 1987 Fleer Bonds = RC*, with the "*" signifying that the player had an XRC in the previous year).

    Beckett stopped identifying cards released between 1989 and 2000 as XRCs at some point in the 90s, so it was either an RC or not. Thus, Greg Vaughn only has one Rookie Card, 1989 Fleer Update, even though in 1990, folks "thought" that his 1989 Fleer Update card was an XRC, and his 1990 base set cards were his RC*.

    For an unknown reason, Beckett decided to bring back the XRC with the Upper Deck Prospect Premiers sets (even though they were sold in packs). So, according to Beckett, the 2001 UD Prospect Premiers card of Ryan Howard is an XRC, while his 2003 cards are his RCs.

    Now, with the new MLB "Rookie Card" policy, Beckett decided to not identify any card past 2006 as a RC, unless it has the offical MLB Rookie Card logo. Thus, Evan Longoria's 2006 Bowman Chrome rookie is not a rookie card (it's not noted as being anything) while his 2008 Bowman Chrome IS a rookie card.

    So, the confusion is alive and well. I use Beckett as a guide, not a Bible, so when it comes to my collection, I'll see what Beckett has to say, then make my own decision. In my house, Dustin Pedroia's 2002 SP Authentic USA Future Watch card is his rookie card, not his 2004 SP Prospects or his 2006 "official MLB Rookie Card" cards. >>



    I agree with this line of thinking.
    My Error & Variation Blog

    Collecting Robin Ventura and Matt Luke.
  • RipublicaninMassRipublicaninMass Posts: 10,051 ✭✭✭
    Personally I saw a thread on here about it, it intrigued me and have been bidding on all of the past few that have gone up for sale.
  • MeteoriteGuyMeteoriteGuy Posts: 7,140 ✭✭
    I don't know how anyone can say, this is the "rule" on rookie cards. I have been in this hobby a long time and there has never been a complete agreeance on what a rookie card was. Or at least not since the days of traded sets. In the past we had, "this is his first card" or "Beckett calls this a XRC" or we added adjectives to the rookie card. This is his "minor league" or this is his "NFL" rookie card. But I can never recall one time when everyone agreed on all cases on what a rookie card and what a rookie isn't. Well, the isn't part can be simple (usually). Instead, or at least since Beckett, there has been, what individuals consider a RC and what "Beckett says.." Now, we have what Beckett, the Major League or what we think.

    Clear Skies,
    Mark
    Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards.
    Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.


  • << <i>I don't know how anyone can say, this is the "rule" on rookie cards. I have been in this hobby a long time and there has never been a complete agreeance on what a rookie card was. Or at least not since the days of traded sets. In the past we had, "this is his first card" or "Beckett calls this a XRC" or we added adjectives to the rookie card. This is his "minor league" or this is his "NFL" rookie card. But I can never recall one time when everyone agreed on all cases on what a rookie card and what a rookie isn't. Well, the isn't part can be simple (usually). Instead, or at least since Beckett, there has been, what individuals consider a RC and what "Beckett says.." Now, we have what Beckett, the Major League or what we think.

    Clear Skies,
    Mark >>



    That's why all uses of the word within this thread have been in quotes.
    My Error & Variation Blog

    Collecting Robin Ventura and Matt Luke.
  • twileytwiley Posts: 1,923
    This is mind blowing...

    DEREK JETER 1993 STADIUM CLUB MURPHY ROOKIE PSA 9 MINT
    LINK


    I am half tempted to sell my PSA 10 for BIN for 350 but my luck the card won't mellow out in 6 months and I will pay even more to get one back. Stadium Cub Murphy's law image
  • MeteoriteGuyMeteoriteGuy Posts: 7,140 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>I don't know how anyone can say, this is the "rule" on rookie cards. I have been in this hobby a long time and there has never been a complete agreeance on what a rookie card was. Or at least not since the days of traded sets. In the past we had, "this is his first card" or "Beckett calls this a XRC" or we added adjectives to the rookie card. This is his "minor league" or this is his "NFL" rookie card. But I can never recall one time when everyone agreed on all cases on what a rookie card and what a rookie isn't. Well, the isn't part can be simple (usually). Instead, or at least since Beckett, there has been, what individuals consider a RC and what "Beckett says.." Now, we have what Beckett, the Major League or what we think.

    Clear Skies,
    Mark >>



    That's why all uses of the word within this thread have been in quotes. >>




    I can read pretty well. Many in this thread have said, this is and that is not. I am just giving my thoughts as well.

    The problem would be simple to solve if this was just about any other hobby or field. The problem with sport cards is there are no clear and recognized leaders in the hobby. All other fields I have been in, have some board or group of people that can get together and vote on such and others usually respect such decisions. You never know what the future will bring or how use will change with words in general, but it is important for us to use terms in the same manner.

    On more the subject at hand. I am surprized the early Stadium Club issues are not very collected graded. When they came out they were so popular and clearly several steps above what was then the norm.

    Clear Skies,
    Mark
    Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards.
    Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
  • Interesting, to think a 100,000+ print run is "tough" to find in Mint or Gem Mint condition. I think the big issue is it's part of the PSA Jeter rookie registry. I think it's absolutely artificial and if I had them, I'd sell like crazy. Definitely feeding off the WS win and start of the BB season. I also think a few people out there speculating on this card believe that ALL of the 30,000 plus sealed sets(wild guess) are all stuck together.
  • twileytwiley Posts: 1,923
    I just found a place that has the sealed set. I paid under 30 bucks per set I bought 10 set. I plan on opening 5. selling 2and keeping 3 sealed for my kids. I will report back if the 5 sets are stuck together image
Sign In or Register to comment.