I am a little confused?

[cards01fan]

I haven't been active for a few years in prospecting. I was recently looking around and I am very confused. Jason Heywards 2007 bowman chrome draft is his rookie card? Or is it the 2008 version. Both cards listed on the bay say that it is his rookie card? Can anyone give me some clarification? thanks

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

You have asked an impossible question now.

2007 Bowman Draft Chrome is his first card.
2008 Bowman Chrome is his first Chrome autograph.
2010 will be his official MLB "True Rookie" card.

That said, the lines have completely blurred as to what is and what isn't a rookie.

 

[cards01fan]

Thanks for the reply. Thats really odd/confusing. I remember hearing about the "New Rookie Card Rules" I thought they were supposed to clear everything up? I wonder ten years from now what collectors will say is his rookie card. On a side note (not comparing the two as players just as cards) what if pujols had not had an auto in 2001, would an auto 2002 chrome be more valuable then?

 

[drays4life]

In my opinion - history will say the 2007 is the RC card. Just because MLB says 2010 is a rookie card doesn't mean anything. It is still likely that 2nd year autos will outsell most rookie cards though because autos are more valuable and popular (assuming there is no rookie year auto). Hard to say with Pujols since there were many more sets in 2001.

 

[011873]

Heyward's TRUE Hobby recognized rookie cards are:
2007 Elite Extra auto
2007 Bowman Sterling auto
2007 Bowman Chrome Draft
2007 Bowman Draft

His 2008 Bowman Chrome is not a rookie card but is "treated" like one in the Hobby because its his first BC auto.

Whenever he has MLB Logo "rookie cards", most of the basic non auto versions wont be worth much at all. Just look at guys who were in similar situations: Longoria, Beckham, Fielder, Hamels, Braun, McCutchen, Lester, Papelbon, etc etc etc etc.

 

[sportscardtheory]

I think the in-between cards are garbage. They have no designation whatsoever. First Bowman Chrome auto? So what. It's an auto, sure, but it's not a first year card and it's not a RC. It's nothing. They do have value, but I don't think they have long-term value like the cards surrounding them. I have said, as a seller, the "two" rookie card thing is awesome, but for collecting for the future, it's completely confusing. I mean, if someone honestly believes Heyward is the next real big thing, what do you go after for the long-term? I guess I would go for the MLB first year auto, the Bowman Sterling.

 

[boxbreaker]

agreed

 

[Topnotchsy]

Heyward's TRUE Hobby recognized rookie cards are:
2007 Elite Extra auto
2007 Bowman Sterling auto
2007 Bowman Chrome Draft
2007 Bowman Draft

His 2008 Bowman Chrome is not a rookie card but is "treated" like one in the Hobby because its his first BC auto.

Whenever he has MLB Logo "rookie cards", most of the basic non auto versions wont be worth much at all. Just look at guys who were in similar situations: Longoria, Beckham, Fielder, Hamels, Braun, McCutchen, Lester, Papelbon, etc etc etc etc.

Not sure I follow the logic (or maybe it's the list.)

Hamels is from 2002 BCDP and has only one RC card. Way before the RC logo/
Lester has a 2006 BC and a 2006 BCDP with the Rookie Logo. There the issue is not that the latter is from a later year, but rather that it's his second Chrome release.
Fielder only had an XRC back in 2002 so his 2005 cards are viewed as "real" rookie cards.
Braun had a RC Auto in 2005 and then the RC logo in 07 which is unsigned.

If you could clarify the position you are presenting I'd be interested.

 

[pigskincardboard]

Good Players will end up with anywhere from 50K Autographs. Think about that number, it's ******* mind blowing.

They'll have one licensed first-card out for the most part.

I'd buy his 2007 BDPP over his 2008 BDPP in a heartbeat.

 

[011873]

Heyward's TRUE Hobby recognized rookie cards are:
2007 Elite Extra auto
2007 Bowman Sterling auto
2007 Bowman Chrome Draft
2007 Bowman Draft

His 2008 Bowman Chrome is not a rookie card but is "treated" like one in the Hobby because its his first BC auto.

Whenever he has MLB Logo "rookie cards", most of the basic non auto versions wont be worth much at all. Just look at guys who were in similar situations: Longoria, Beckham, Fielder, Hamels, Braun, McCutchen, Lester, Papelbon, etc etc etc etc.

Not sure I follow the logic (or maybe it's the list.)

Hamels is from 2002 BCDP and has only one RC card. Way before the RC logo/
Lester has a 2006 BC and a 2006 BCDP with the Rookie Logo. There the issue is not that the latter is from a later year, but rather that it's his second Chrome release.
Fielder only had an XRC back in 2002 so his 2005 cards are viewed as "real" rookie cards.
Braun had a RC Auto in 2005 and then the RC logo in 07 which is unsigned.

If you could clarify the position you are presenting I'd be interested.

Bascially what Im saying is that a player's MLB logo card (un autographed) is basically worthless compared to that players TRUE rookie card.

Cases in point of non autos (using aprox. BV)
Hamels 02 BCDP $15......Hamels 06 BC RC Logo $2
Braun 05 TCT $15........Braun 07 BCDP RC Logo $2
Longo 06 Bow Her $12...Longo 08 BDP RC Logo $4
McCutch 05 BCDP $8.......McCutch 09 BC RC Logo $2
Papelbon 03 BCDP $15.....Papelbon 06 BC $2
Zimmerman 05 Sweet Spot $10.........Zimm "2006 whatever" RC Logo $1

 

[cards01fan]

Thanks for your replies ( Had to head out to my daughters basketball game), and thanks for the info, that clears it up a little!