What is Pedro Alvarez's true rookie card?

BPorter26

I need some help, I was looking on ebay tonight and the only licensed rookies for Pedro Alvarez are from Topps products in 2011. The cards before 2011 are from Razor, Tristar and UD USA. BTW how about those Pirates?

otwcards

Potentially his 2006/07 UD USA issues...

swartz1

A.J. Burnett for comeback player of the year...

He is real classy, he doesn't bust up toilets anymore...LOL

Dboneesq

Bobby ... how do you like this autographed card?

SOM

That's a pretty artistic autograph!

Very cool.

digicat

You'd probably want to find his:
2011 Topps Triple Threads #138 Pedro Alvarez Jsy AU RC #/99.


Since it's a "base" card in the Triple Threads set, it's considered a RC by Beckett and MLB.

alifaxwa2

<< <i>Bobby ... how do you like this autographed card? >>


Nice!

alifaxwa2

From what I recall, a few years back, MLB created a rule that rookie cards are only the cards put out right after or shortly after MLB debut, so the 2011 is considered his true rookies. The earlier ones are considered minor league cards or prospect cards. If you are thinking about the pirates all time set, it will be something from 2011. The aforementioned TTT won't qualify, so it would prob be topps or topps chrome.

But if your thinking about investment purposes, then it will be an earlier issued card. Razor and Tristar are junk. Alot of prospectors like the UD USA, as they tend to be a players first card, but I don't think considered than a professional card.

digicat

<< <i>The aforementioned TTT won't qualify, so it would prob be topps or topps chrome. >>



No, the TTT card would qualify because it's:
1) from 2011
2) has the official rookie logo on it
3) is part of a base set (even though it's auto'ed and has a relic).

Beckett even has "RC" next to it.

SOM

Why doesn't his regular issue Topps card from 2011 have the RC logo on it?

digicat

Ack, I'm totally wrong. There was no RC logo on the TTT, or any of his cards for that matter. However, it's recognized as a RC by Beckett because the other criteria apply.

The only Pedro Alvarez card that appears to have the RC logo on it is the 2010 eTopps card. However, Beckett doesn't list it as a rookie card. Apparently eTopps don't count when they make their decisions?

Here's one on Ebay: link

It's his first in a pro uniform, and it's officially licensed, and it has the rookie logo on it. Maybe you could call it his XRC?

alifaxwa2

<< <i>

<< <i>The aforementioned TTT won't qualify, so it would prob be topps or topps chrome. >>



No, the TTT card would qualify because it's:
1) from 2011
2) has the official rookie logo on it
3) is part of a base set (even though it's auto'ed and has a relic).

Beckett even has "RC" next to it. >>


Not for the regIstry, it won't qualify, 99 is too shortprinted.

Dboneesq

<< <i>

<< <i>Bobby ... how do you like this autographed card? >>


Nice! >>


Jeff ... you like this card too? LMAO

digicat

<< <i>Not for the regIstry, it won't qualify, 99 is too shortprinted. >>



Well then, that'll be an easy card to pick up (25 cents) and get graded. Topps or Bowman. Take your pick.

Personally, I'd rather have the 2010 eTopps.

BPorter26

Thanks guys for the insight on the Pedro cards. I'll probably buy his 2011 Topps Chrome. Btw Doug that '55 Alvarez is freaking cool as hell.

Dboneesq

<< <i>Btw Doug that '55 Alvarez is freaking cool as hell. >>


Thanks Bobby! Jeff made the custom. He sent me a couple and I got them signed by Pedro. My mom knows his parents.

Morgoth

Its convaluted due to him signing an exclusive deal with Razor (now Leaf) in 2008.

He has 2008 Autos in Razor but they are not in a Pirates uni. Pretty ugly looking stuff but it is on card.

He has a 2009 Topps Futures Jersey and Patch card. I have the regular and the gold version.

He has a 2010 E-Topps card in a Pirates Uni (first card as a Pirate) and a E-Topps Minor league card.

In 2011 he had his first regular pack issued Pirates cards and Autos. However, he never signed any of his auto cards to my knowledge (I don't know if the Razor exclusive was still kicking in at the time).

In my opinion the E-Topps from 2010 is his first real card. It shows him in his ML uniform for the first time and is issued by a major company.

I don't consider USA stuff in the mix personally and that is just me. I prefer rookie cards of players to be in MLB unis if possible.

I have his 2011 Topps Canary 1/1 and about 10 2010 E Topps. I wish he signed some of his cooler autos in 2011.

digicat

<< <i>In 2011 he had his first regular pack issued Pirates cards and Autos. However, he never signed any of his auto cards to my knowledge (I don't know if the Razor exclusive was still kicking in at the time). >>



That'd explain why I couldn't find a picture of that card.



So.... if he went back and signed them here in 2012, would those TTT cards still count as 2011 cards?

vladguerrero

This thread became more complicated than I had imagined. Informative read though.

Morgoth

<< <i>

<< <i>In 2011 he had his first regular pack issued Pirates cards and Autos. However, he never signed any of his auto cards to my knowledge (I don't know if the Razor exclusive was still kicking in at the time). >>



That'd explain why I couldn't find a picture of that card.



So.... if he went back and signed them here in 2012, would those TTT cards still count as 2011 cards? >>



Yes but Topps would have to actually issue them this late which I doubt they would but hey he had a Museum Auto, and they were awesome so if that every got released I would be all over it.

I just bought the Bowman Chrome Superfractor today...................degenerate.

digicat

<< <i>Yes but Topps would have to actually issue them this late which I doubt they would but hey he had a Museum Auto, and they were awesome so if that every got released I would be all over it. >>



Did redemption cards come in place of the Alvarez TTT, or did they just not issue it?

alifaxwa2

Bobby, what did u get as McCutchen's RC?

BPorter26

<< <i>Bobby, what did u get as McCutchen's RC? >>



Jeff, I bought 2004 Bowman Alfac auto card, which was a 2006 buy back. I haven't been big into newer cards, but with the way the Bucs have been playing I wanted to grab a couple of the guys I really enjoy watching. For Neil Walker I have his 2004 Bowman Heritage Auto.

I would think Cutch's 2004 Bowman AFLAC would be his true rookie , but in a Pirates uniform that's not auto'ed I would say 2005 Topps or Bowman Chrome?

What do you think?

alifaxwa2

I bought 2005 Topps chrome update autograph because I prefer autographed rookie cards.

But because of the new rule he has rookies into 04/05 and 2009 after his debut. honestly I have no idea what PSA would choose to put in a registry but beyond what I already have I would likely buy 2009 Topps chrome for that purpose.

ThoseBackPages

This set as a whole is pretty under-appreciate imo

MBMiller25

Sweet Cutch card Bobby!

BPorter26

<< <i>I bought 2005 Topps chrome update autograph because I prefer autographed rookie cards. But because of the new rule he has rookies into 04/05 and 2009 after his debut. honestly I have no idea what PSA would choose to put in a registry but beyond what I already have I would likely buy 2009 Topps chrome for that purpose. >>



Matt, Thanks

Jeff, I had his 2005 Topps Chrome refractor auto and Bowman Sterling auto which I sold a couple years ago. That was a brilliant move.

epatmythes

Prime example of the powers that be within the hobby not being able to work well with each other!!!

Beckett does not recognize eTopps as a true card brand... because they were limited and sold on a first-come, first-serve basis online only... not a standard issue packed-out product. To me, this is stupid, but it is what it is, and because Beckett says so... the hobby follows!

However, eTopps was flexible and could put out a card of a guy if he just got called up, hence the 2010 eTopps card... and following the MLB rules, they put a RC logo on it!

Now, since he had an officially licensed Topps card (even though Beckett doesn't consider them real cards, sigh) in 2010 with a RC logo on it... they technically could not put the RC logo on any of his 2011 cards!

So, Beckett can't have a guy not have a Rookie Card, and since they won't get off the stance that eTopps aren't real set cards, they list all his base 2011 cards as RC... even though none of them have the official MLB RC logo!

So, technically, Pedro Alvarez doesn't have a true RC!

If you want the card that you can, for all intents and purposes, believe to truly be his true RC... get the 2010 eTopps card! If you want to be like the hobby 99%er's... and follow whatever Beckett says as bible... pick your favor 2011 issue!

gemint

This is why I hate and don't collect modern. I like to own a '55 Clemente, '63 Stargell, '57 Maz and '74 Parker and have no questions that those are their rookie cards.

Morgoth

I just picked up my 3rd copy of the 2005 Topps Red Xfractor McCutchen RC numbered out of 25. I also have his 2004 AFLAC Auto BGS 9/10. Last year I got a 2005 Topps Chrome Refractor Auto Cutch on BIN for 25 bucks.

Pedro's 2010 E-Topps should be his RC period its the only one that makes sense.

Yes all of Pedro's 2011 Autos were redemptions. I learned my lesson on redemptions a long time ago and will only buy them once I see the card actually issued. I waited and waited for Pedro autos to come out, it killed me as Museum autos and TTT autos were going cheap. Thank god I waited as they never came out.

I think Pedro is not very social or friendly to media or fans right now, possible due to the horrendous treatment he recieved last year by both. Called Kdro in the press and booed every at bat virtually. If it wasn't Razor issues then maybe he felt like he didn't need to give fans some auto, hopefully he gets over it.

He just hit his 16 HR tonight in a loss but still killed it. Cutch went 3/5 and back up to .360 avg.

sportscardtheory

The most BASIC RC rules are that the card has to be part of a MLB licensed base set and released in packs or in an "extended" or traded-type box set. That would make his 2011 base cards his RCs under the most basic RC rules.

Morgoth

<< <i>The most BASIC RC rules are that the card has to be part of a MLB licensed base set and released in packs or in an "extended" or traded-type box set. That would make his 2011 base cards his RCs under the most basic RC rules. >>



Screw the rules, the card is very easy to find and pick up and not overly limited. It would not cause issues with scarcity and it has the RC logo on it unlike his 2011 issues. Its 2012, with the decline of hobby shops, a internet or ebay offered card should be considered the same as a traded or extended type of card anyway.

sportscardtheory

<< <i>

<< <i>The most BASIC RC rules are that the card has to be part of a MLB licensed base set and released in packs or in an "extended" or traded-type box set. That would make his 2011 base cards his RCs under the most basic RC rules. >>



Screw the rules, the card is very easy to find and pick up and not overly limited. It would not cause issues with scarcity and it has the RC logo on it unlike his 2011 issues. Its 2012, with the decline of hobby shops, a internet or ebay offered card should be considered the same as a traded or extended type of card anyway. >>



I'm fine with anyone's subjective interpretation of the RC, but with zero rules it's just anarchy. I would think that at least very basic "rules" should be adhered to.

digicat

<< <i>I'm fine with anyone's subjective interpretation of the RC, but with zero rules it's just anarchy. I would think that at least very basic "rules" should be adhered to. >>



That's one of the reasons why I don't do the PSA set registry anymore. If I don't want to have to get some common base card graded, I don't have to. I can pick any card I want.

And, if I want to show off my collection, I can use Photobucket and do this: my Giants collection

Morgoth

Just got this in hand today. 2011 Bowman Chrome Pedro Superfractor. I also have his 2011 Topps Canary 1/1.

BPorter26

Great looking Pedro