Name the top 5 inserts from 1990s & for the 2000s

[uniquebaseballcards]

This is an interesting problem space. I feel the list should be A). Parallel sets and B). Insert sets

A).
1993 Finest Refractors are King.
1996 Mirror Golds
1998 Crusades
1997 Totally Certified Platinum Gold

B).
1997 Gold Die cut Embossed Refractors
Precious Metals
Any thing redemption
Finest "The Man" and "Centurions"
Leaf Die-cuts

Crusades are inserts though, embossed refractors and Leaf (matrix/materials) die-cuts are parallels! I think the precious metals are also parallels.

 

[George_Calfas]

Die cut embossed refractors are a insert since they do not run their entire print run of the set, others listed are inserts due to different materials or shape of die cuts.
Crusades while inserted run an entire set for each color and the purple and red should reconsidered parallels.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

Die cut embossed refractors are a insert since they do not run their entire print run of the set, others listed are inserts due to different materials or shape of die cuts.
Crusades while inserted run an entire set for each color and the purple and red should reconsidered parallels.

I'm of the understanding that it's commonly accepted that parallels... simply parallel the look of their base cards. I'd be very curious to know if anyone else thought different.

In essence Crusade greens are inserts and crusade purples and reds are *insert parallels*. But while this 'insert parrallel' may be a new designation, Crusades as a whole are all closer to straight inserts than parallels because the 'base' Crusade is itself an insert.

There are Leaf die-cuts (Z2/diamond axis) parallels that exist for every card in their base set so I'd assume we'd agree these are all parallels. But (x,y,z,wood,nylon,plastic,bronze,silver,gold) all still parallel the look of their base - and even each other. Embossed refs are in the same boat as the Leaf die-cuts one can easily tell the set they parallel.

 

[fonda1119]

It is difficult to name a top 5 list for the 2000s that doesn't include an autograph or GU. 90s obviously is completely different. I'm honestly having difficultly naming stand-alone-non-parallel insert sets from the 2000s.

Definitely a personal preference of mine but I really like the 07 Spectrum Grand Slamarama insert set. Odds of falling were 1 per case.

 

[FLOUR]

Looks like most people here would not be able to identify an insert if it hit them in the butt. That said, I'll list some fleer brand ones as they tend to be my favorites.

1. 1997 Fleer Diamond Tribute
2. 1998 Ultra Diamond Immortals
3. 1999 Ultra Diamond Producers
4. 1999 Metal Linch-Pins
5. 1998 Ultra Diamond Producers

These are all really beautiful tough inserts as they were seeded one a case.

 

[Gwynn545]

Looks like most people here would not be able to identify an insert if it hit them in the butt. That said, I'll list some fleer brand ones as they tend to be my favorites.

1. 1997 Fleer Diamond Tribute
2. 1998 Ultra Diamond Immortals
3. 1999 Ultra Diamond Producers
4. 1999 Metal Linch-Pins
5. 1998 Ultra Diamond Producers

These are all really beautiful tough inserts as they were seeded one a case.

What a stupid comment... ::facepalm::

 

[Gwynn545]

Looks like most people here would not be able to identify an insert if it hit them in the butt. That said, I'll list some fleer brand ones as they tend to be my favorites.

1. 1997 Fleer Diamond Tribute
2. 1998 Ultra Diamond Immortals
3. 1999 Ultra Diamond Producers
4. 1999 Metal Linch-Pins
5. 1998 Ultra Diamond Producers

These are all really beautiful tough inserts as they were seeded one a case.

What a stupid comment... idiotic...::facepalm::

 

[FLOUR]

Hey I pretty much looked at the first page and all I really saw were parallells. Takes the fun out of it all. Takes the fun out of that other 90s insert topic, too.

 

[trauty]

Number 1 on the list would have to be 1998 Flair Showcase Perfect 10's. Only 10 of each card made. And, it's an insert set not a parallel.

 

[Gwynn545]

Hey I pretty much looked at the first page and all I really saw were parallells. Takes the fun out of it all. Takes the fun out of that other 90s insert topic, too.

Oh yeah, that other "insert" thread has really not been fun. 850 pages, 13,245 posts...all those idiots posting parallels!
FLOUR! Where have you been? You need to post more often and enlighten us! What is this insert that you speak of?

 

[AndruwHRJones]

Personally, I don't really care if you refer to it as an insert or parallel. All of the cards listed so far are highly sought after cards and are all justified to be on any top 5, 10, etc.. list.

With that said, I am assuming the OP was referring to inserts and parallels as he didn't specifically point out that he did not want to include parallels.

 

[George_Calfas]

Die cut embossed refractors are a insert since they do not run their entire print run of the set, others listed are inserts due to different materials or shape of die cuts.
Crusades while inserted run an entire set for each color and the purple and red should reconsidered parallels.

I'm of the understanding that it's commonly accepted that parallels... simply parallel the look of their base cards. I'd be very curious to know if anyone else thought different.

In essence Crusade greens are inserts and crusade purples and reds are *insert parallels*. But while this 'insert parrallel' may be a new designation, Crusades as a whole are all closer to straight inserts than parallels because the 'base' Crusade is itself an insert.

There are Leaf die-cuts (Z2/diamond axis) parallels that exist for every card in their base set so I'd assume we'd agree these are all parallels. But (x,y,z,wood,nylon,plastic,bronze,silver,gold) all still parallel the look of their base - and even each other. Embossed refs are in the same boat as the Leaf die-cuts one can easily tell the set they parallel.

I do not disagree; I guess I define it a bit differently.

 

[magicpapa]

[quote="George_Calfas":1ls6m0qm]Die cut embossed refractors are a insert since they do not run their entire print run of the set, others listed are inserts due to different materials or shape of die cuts.
Crusades while inserted run an entire set for each color and the purple and red should reconsidered parallels.

I'm of the understanding that it's commonly accepted that parallels... simply parallel the look of their base cards. I'd be very curious to know if anyone else thought different.

In essence Crusade greens are inserts and crusade purples and reds are *insert parallels*. But while this 'insert parrallel' may be a new designation, Crusades as a whole are all closer to straight inserts than parallels because the 'base' Crusade is itself an insert.

There are Leaf die-cuts (Z2/diamond axis) parallels that exist for every card in their base set so I'd assume we'd agree these are all parallels. But (x,y,z,wood,nylon,plastic,bronze,silver,gold) all still parallel the look of their base - and even each other. Embossed refs are in the same boat as the Leaf die-cuts one can easily tell the set they parallel.

I do not disagree; I guess I define it a bit differently.[/quote:1ls6m0qm]
"you say tomato, I say tomahto".

 

[sportscardtheory]

Who gives a **** about the difference between parallel and insert. Anything that isn't part of the base set is an insert to me. Parallels ARE inserts that are called parallels. Who says they are two different things. Neither are part of the base set. How ridiculous that some get up-in-arms over semantics.

 

[BunchOBull]

I think the etymology of the word "insert" in the hobby began with the earliest of Topps "extras;" i.e. tattoos, stickers, stamps, embossed cards, die cuts, etc. In the early '90s, it was transformed into anything that had insertion odds - be them 1:1 or 1:1,000,000 - while subsets continued to be themed collections within the base run of a set. The late '90s brought with it limited press on "base cards," thus creating manufactured scarcity on what was released as a base set. That screwed everything up, and the term "short print" became common terminology again, but for very different reasons as compared to the short prints of the early Topps years.

So it's all up to interpretation.

To me, an insert is anything that isn't a part of a base set, including parallels and unique mini sets. In the modern hobby, short printed cards are almost included in that definition, as sets that include short prints (thinking A&G or Heritage) get marketed as "base sets," those without the SPs, and "base master sets," those with SPs.

My Take -

Year/Brand/Set
---Base Set
------Standard Prints
---------Subsets
------Short Prints
---------Subsets
---Inserts
------Base and SP Parallels
------Unique Mini Sets
---------Parallels

 

[nosterbor]

For the 90's " Inserts " i say this.
1998 Collector's Choice StarQuest Home Run serial numbered to 100
Yes i know 100 is way more than 5 or 25, just try finding the damn things.
As for the 2000's way to many to choose from, that is why the 90's was the greatest decade in sports cards.
How many Mantle 52 Topps have you seen in the past 10 years
Now how many Juan Gonzalez or any other player from 98 StarQuest home runs have you seen.
Zero Juans! and very little of any other player.