The All-time Red Sox collection shows the Ramirez rookie card as his 1992 Bowman Gold Foil. Still not too hard to get in PSA 10, less than $50.00. It's a nice card, shows Manny in street clothes and a short hair cut.
As previously mentioned, it's 1992 Bowman (non foil) and 1992 Fleer Update. There is no question that either card is THE key rookie card. None.
"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."
There is an argument as to whether an update set rookie is ever a true rookie if the player has had a card come out in other companies' regular sets the same year. E.g., is the '89 Topps Traded Griffey a true rookie, considering that several other companies put him in their base sets? Is the '87 Fleer Update G. Maddux a true rookie, considering that Donruss put him in their base set?
I take the position that it's not, which makes the Bowman Piazza his best rookie.
The Bowman Foils are really not that hard to find in 10's. And as far as the Topps Draft pick goes, I've got like 5 or 6 of those raw. I pulled all of them from the same box.
I think Manny's most expensive ungraded is the 92 bowman, but most expensive graded gem is the 1992 topps gold.... Raw, either of his autographed minors sell for more than any of his major league cards.
<< <i>The Bowman Foils are really not that hard to find in 10's. And as far as the Topps Draft pick goes, I've got like 5 or 6 of those raw. I pulled all of them from the same box. >>
I know the BGS 9.5 of Manny's Topps Gold sells for more than any other Manny. (not the winner version). It used to sell for about $250, but lately been selling for about $100. (at least last time i checked)
Yea, it really is a shame that many of today's and yesterday's players from the 80s and 90s didn't have any rare or exciting rookies. For many of those cards, i collected the tiffanys (most sp to 5000), and also collected psa/dna rookies of those players. I will also collect a rookie reprint auto where i can find one as well.
This is what i got for manny along those lines (besides the topps gold bgs 9.5 and ud gold holo psa 9). Wish I could find something decent for piazza....his minor league (pic posted earlier) is the only thing decent i have.
Gold holograms were used in all 1992 Upper Deck factory sets while in 1993 Upper Deck inserted a super secret gold hologram factory set in each 20 factory set case (unmarked, so you had to bust open the seal to find out which one). I sure wouldn't mind getting those someday.
<< <i>Gold holograms were used in all 1992 Upper Deck factory sets while in 1993 Upper Deck inserted a super secret gold hologram factory set in each 20 factory set case (unmarked, so you had to bust open the seal to find out which one). I sure wouldn't mind getting those someday. >>
really? more common than the regular 92 ud? I know book is more, although still just a few bucks.
For Piazza, what about the Donruss Phenoms...i think that is his most difficult, although his bowman and fleer books more for some odd reason?
<< <i>There is an argument as to whether an update set rookie is ever a true rookie if the player has had a card come out in other companies' regular sets the same year. >>
That is quite honestly a silly argument that doesn't hold water. Update sets are just as readily available as regular issues. If Clemens or Puckett had a regular issue card in '84, would we just disregard '84 Fleer Update despite the fact that they're clearly more valuable? If we're talking Topps Gold, Topps Tiffany, any of that stuff, yeah, not eligible for key mainstream rookies. But update sets clearly are.
"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."
<< <i>Gold holograms were used in all 1992 Upper Deck factory sets while in 1993 Upper Deck inserted a super secret gold hologram factory set in each 20 factory set case (unmarked, so you had to bust open the seal to find out which one). I sure wouldn't mind getting those someday. >>
really? more common than the regular 92 ud? I know book is more, although still just a few bucks. >>
No no no no no, like I said, the gold holograms were ONLY for the factory sets; the regular foil/jumbo pack cards have the standard issue silver holograms. So gold holograms are somewhat harder to come by, but obiously not nearly as much as the 1993 gold holograms.
<< <i><< There is an argument as to whether an update set rookie is ever a true rookie if the player has had a card come out in other companies' regular sets the same year. >>
That is quite honestly a silly argument that doesn't hold water. Update sets are just as readily available as regular issues. If Clemens or Puckett had a regular issue card in '84, would we just disregard '84 Fleer Update despite the fact that they're clearly more valuable? If we're talking Topps Gold, Topps Tiffany, any of that stuff, yeah, not eligible for key mainstream rookies. But update sets clearly are. >>
Clearly is a substitute for analysis. Topps Tiffany was distributed only in complete set form, just as '84 Fleer Update Clemens and Puckett were.
Why should a card distributed in this fashion - which is almost guaranteed to have a higher overall average grade than one distributed in packs, and which usually comes out long after the regular sets do, be a true rookie alongside the card in packs that made up part of a base set?
The Maddux presents the most interesting case - both the Fleer Update and Fleer Update Glossy were issued at the same time and in the same fashion. Why should one be a true rookie and not the other?
For years, Beckett magazine considered cards from update sets to be XRCs rather than true RCs even when there were no base set cards that year of that player. A substantial portion of collectors agreed, and disliked the change Beckett made. Were they all silly?
IMO update sets deserve to be the "stepchildren" of the hobby.
The concept of a "true rookie card" is about as relevant as Beckett's pricing. One guy thinks it's Bowman, one guy thinks it's Fleer Update. One guy thinks Tiffany's count, one guy doesn't. The truth is it's irrelevant because there is no such thing as a "True Rookie" as long as there is more than one card of a guy made in any given year. The market decides what the most sought after card is by virtue of supply and demand. Whether you choose to agree with the market is up to you.
Comments
1992 fleer update for Piazza
<< <i>yeah but his fleer update is hands down "THE" rookie. >>
I own three Piazza fleet update rookies but have never actually seen them. They are still in the sealed box.
1955 Bowman Raw complete with 90% Ex-NR or better
Now seeking 1949 Eureka Sportstamps...NM condition
Working on '78 Autographed set now 99.9% complete -
Working on '89 Topps autoed set now complete
Still not too hard to get in PSA 10, less than $50.00. It's a nice card, shows Manny in street clothes and a short hair cut.
<< <i>yeah but his fleer update is hands down "THE" rookie. >>
Why is this?
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...
<< <i>Why is this? >>
The Fleer Update is more limited and released in factory set form only. The Bowman is much easier to find.
Also his upperdeck with Gold Holofoil is hard to find.
not the winners version.
<< <i>I've got a Manny minor league card. Anyone interested? >>
which one?
if either of these, i am interested
I take the position that it's not, which makes the Bowman Piazza his best rookie.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
<< <i>hofautos, what card are you referring to when you say upperdeck with Gold Holofoil? I think I may have that one..... >>
The hologram on the back...most are silver...they have some with a gold hologram.
Raw, either of his autographed minors sell for more than any of his major league cards.
<< <i>The Bowman Foils are really not that hard to find in 10's. And as far as the Topps Draft pick goes, I've got like 5 or 6 of those raw. I pulled all of them from the same box. >>
I know the BGS 9.5 of Manny's Topps Gold sells for more than any other Manny. (not the winner version). It used to sell for about $250, but lately been selling for about $100. (at least last time i checked)
This is what i got for manny along those lines (besides the topps gold bgs 9.5 and ud gold holo psa 9). Wish I could find something decent for piazza....his minor league (pic posted earlier) is the only thing decent i have.
<< <i>Yep, I've got that one....the 92 UD Gold Hologram...didn't know it was even rare! What is it worth? >>
not much but hard to find...if someone would bother looking
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
<< <i>Gold holograms were used in all 1992 Upper Deck factory sets while in 1993 Upper Deck inserted a super secret gold hologram factory set in each 20 factory set case (unmarked, so you had to bust open the seal to find out which one). I sure wouldn't mind getting those someday. >>
really? more common than the regular 92 ud? I know book is more, although still just a few bucks.
For Piazza, what about the Donruss Phenoms...i think that is his most difficult, although his bowman and fleer books more for some odd reason?
<< <i>There is an argument as to whether an update set rookie is ever a true rookie if the player has had a card come out in other companies' regular sets the same year. >>
That is quite honestly a silly argument that doesn't hold water. Update sets are just as readily available as regular issues. If Clemens or Puckett had a regular issue card in '84, would we just disregard '84 Fleer Update despite the fact that they're clearly more valuable? If we're talking Topps Gold, Topps Tiffany, any of that stuff, yeah, not eligible for key mainstream rookies. But update sets clearly are.
<< <i>
<< <i>Gold holograms were used in all 1992 Upper Deck factory sets while in 1993 Upper Deck inserted a super secret gold hologram factory set in each 20 factory set case (unmarked, so you had to bust open the seal to find out which one). I sure wouldn't mind getting those someday. >>
really? more common than the regular 92 ud? I know book is more, although still just a few bucks.
>>
No no no no no, like I said, the gold holograms were ONLY for the factory sets; the regular foil/jumbo pack cards have the standard issue silver holograms. So gold holograms are somewhat harder to come by, but obiously not nearly as much as the 1993 gold holograms.
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
<< <i><< There is an argument as to whether an update set rookie is ever a true rookie if the player has had a card come out in other companies' regular sets the same year. >>
That is quite honestly a silly argument that doesn't hold water. Update sets are just as readily available as regular issues. If Clemens or Puckett had a regular issue card in '84, would we just disregard '84 Fleer Update despite the fact that they're clearly more valuable? If we're talking Topps Gold, Topps Tiffany, any of that stuff, yeah, not eligible for key mainstream rookies. But update sets clearly are. >>
Clearly is a substitute for analysis. Topps Tiffany was distributed only in complete set form, just as '84 Fleer Update Clemens and Puckett were.
Why should a card distributed in this fashion - which is almost guaranteed to have a higher overall average grade than one distributed in packs, and which usually comes out long after the regular sets do, be a true rookie alongside the card in packs that made up part of a base set?
The Maddux presents the most interesting case - both the Fleer Update and Fleer Update Glossy were issued at the same time and in the same fashion. Why should one be a true rookie and not the other?
For years, Beckett magazine considered cards from update sets to be XRCs rather than true RCs even when there were no base set cards that year of that player. A substantial portion of collectors agreed, and disliked the change Beckett made. Were they all silly?
IMO update sets deserve to be the "stepchildren" of the hobby.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.