Question on McCutchen Rookies...

[Adamsince1981]

So if I go up to the common man on the street and show him two cards of any player who has/had a big league career, one with a RC logo and one without, this man will always want and pay more for the one without the RC logo?


[quote="Jays_Cards":hktcwxje]Most people prefer MLB RC Logos simply because they can get a card with a stamped RC Logo for pennies compared to the price of a similar FY card. You can hold whatever belief you want, but simple desirability and market value prove the opposite.

Are you essentially trying to prove the point that only uneducated individuals would buy a MLB RC Logo "RC" over the players more valuable and earlier release????

No, I am proving a point that only an educated, passionate card collector would spend hundreds/thousands of dollars on a baseball card. Showing a random guy on the street a card with a market value of $1000 would mean the same as showing him card with a market value of $.50.[/quote:hktcwxje]

I was responding to uniquelywrongopiniononbaseballcards...

 

[onehrk]

Consider...

If you offered someone a card of player X made in 2005 (with first year designation) or a card of player X made in 2007 (with rookie logo), you will find that, based on market value, the card of player X made in 2005 will be preferred. It seems that with the rise of Bowman Chrome as our hobby's "king", "first year" cards have taken the place of the traditional rookie card. For that reason, I do not designate them first year cards. They are rookies (i.e., the first issued card of a player in a MLB uniform with a MLB license). The rookie logos are nothing more than a ploy to renew interest in products that would otherwise be worthless.

Calling these cards minor league cards is laughable at best. Some of these players actually do have minor league cards produced as well, either in the same year or subsequent years. It seems to me, that you will find over the years that minor league cards feature players in minor league uniforms while major league cards feature players in major league uniforms.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

Please. Even if all this is antithetical to your beliefs, you're going to tell me otherwise? No, better yet, you're going to tell me that everyone who would be interested in buying a baseball card can name a minor league player...or twenty.

Your polls seem to exist in an effort to inform people of minor league players, so yes, it is relevant to this post. Or do you expect everyone here to know every player on your list? I don't think so.

What's most important is the following statement you happened to gloss over: "Why on earth would 99.5% of the people interested in buying cards be interested in shelling out serious cash for someone they don't know in a lesser league they know nothing about? " Even if the actual number were 99.4% or even 50%, why would people buy something they knew absolutely nothing about?

Your constant efforts to educate those unfamiliar with the MiLB nonwithstanding - particularly on this board - I'm sorry to say you can't say I'm wrong.

Perhaps this is one of the biggest reasons why you're polling so often here - its an effort to get people to at least recognize the names of MiLB players and stir up interest. I actually applaud this effort.

You continue to think that elite collectors dominate the market, probably because you think of yourself as one... but the number of 'elite collectors' might comprise .5% of people who may be interested in buying cards - on a good day. These other 99.5% of people have no clue about prospects, and are lucky to be able to name half the guys on their favorite team.

Why on earth would 99.5% of the people interested in buying cards be interested in shelling out serious cash for someone they don't know in a lesser league they know nothing about? Or am I making this up.

Just as your effort to completely dodge the question I asked - I'm sorry to say - hasn't gone unnoticed. You continue to pronounce yourself as being in the right without a shred of evidence.

My polls have nothing to do with this thread. Again, I ask - what research have you conducted to back up your claims?

 

[Adamsince1981]

Please. Even if all this is antithetical to your beliefs, you're going to tell me otherwise? No, better yet, you're going to tell me that everyone who would be interested in buying a baseball card can name a minor league player...or twenty.

Your polls seem to exist in an effort to inform people of minor league players, so yes, it is relevant to this post. Or do you expect everyone here to know every player on your list? I don't think so.

What's most important is the following statement you happened to gloss over: "Why on earth would 99.5% of the people interested in buying cards be interested in shelling out serious cash for someone they don't know in a lesser league they know nothing about? " Even if the actual number were 99.4% or even 50%, why would people buy something they knew absolutely nothing about?

Your constant efforts to educate those unfamiliar with the MiLB nonwithstanding - particularly on this board - I'm sorry to say you can't say I'm wrong.

Perhaps this is one of the biggest reasons why you're polling so often here - its an effort to get people to at least recognize the names of MiLB players and stir up interest. I actually applaud this effort.

You continue to think that elite collectors dominate the market, probably because you think of yourself as one... but the number of 'elite collectors' might comprise .5% of people who may be interested in buying cards - on a good day. These other 99.5% of people have no clue about prospects, and are lucky to be able to name half the guys on their favorite team.

Why on earth would 99.5% of the people interested in buying cards be interested in shelling out serious cash for someone they don't know in a lesser league they know nothing about? Or am I making this up.

Just as your effort to completely dodge the question I asked - I'm sorry to say - hasn't gone unnoticed. You continue to pronounce yourself as being in the right without a shred of evidence.

My polls have nothing to do with this thread. Again, I ask - what research have you conducted to back up your claims?

You STILL didn't answer Jaypers question and your responses are simply incorrect.

 

[onehrk]

What's most important is the following statement you happened to gloss over: "Why on earth would 99.5% of the people interested in buying cards be interested in shelling out serious cash for someone they don't know in a lesser league they know nothing about? " Even if the actual number were 99.4% or even 50%, why would people buy something they knew absolutely nothing about?

Because fans are much more knowledgeable than you give them credit for being. You don't think fans of Major League ball clubs pay attention to who may be their next saving grace? Why on earth would anyone be an Oakland Athletics fan at this point in time then?

 

[aw00d05]

What's most important is the following statement you happened to gloss over: "Why on earth would 99.5% of the people interested in buying cards be interested in shelling out serious cash for someone they don't know in a lesser league they know nothing about? " Even if the actual number were 99.4% or even 50%, why would people buy something they knew absolutely nothing about?

Because fans are much more knowledgeable than you give them credit for being. You don't think fans of Major League ball clubs pay attention to who may be their next saving grace? Why on earth would anyone be an Oakland Athletics fan at this point in time then?

That's how the Rangers were at the end of last year, and during alot of games they'd have John Daniels in the booth and talk about the minor league guys...What I find funny is that uniquebaseballcards likes to avoid people/questions who disprove his "facts".

 

[Jaypers]

Please. Even if all this is antithetical to your beliefs, you're going to tell me otherwise? No, better yet, you're going to tell me that everyone who would be interested in buying a baseball card can name a minor league player...or twenty.

Your polls seem to exist in an effort to inform people of minor league players, so yes, it is relevant to this post. Or do you expect everyone here to know every player on your list? I don't think so.

What's most important is the following statement you happened to gloss over: "Why on earth would 99.5% of the people interested in buying cards be interested in shelling out serious cash for someone they don't know in a lesser league they know nothing about? " Even if the actual number were 99.4% or even 50%, why would people buy something they knew absolutely nothing about?

Once again, you avoided answering my question. Keep trying to skirt the issue.

I think I have my answer. :lol: "I have done no research whatsoever". Next time, just admit it.

My polls have nothing to do with the primary issues brought up within this thread -- McCutchen and rookie cards vs. prospect cards.

And just for the record, at least I'm not pulling numbers out of thin air, as you clearly are. I can say, with absolute certainty, that 46% of those who voted in my Orioles poll on these boards chose Brian Matusz as the O's top prospect at this instant. You really think the majority of card collectors haven't heard of these names before, ever? Good. Keep thinking that, and I'm pretty sure you'll be in the minority.

Hey, maybe I'll just say "67.9% of people think Uniquebaseballcards will be eating chicken for dinner tonight"? That would be just as correct as you seem to think you are.

My work is done here, so you can save your reply to this post, although I'm sure your ego won't allow that. Have fun.

 

[cgilmo]

debates like this make me ::facepalm::


How long are you guys going to argue before you realize that the two items are not mutually exclusive?

You are both right.

 

[Adamsince1981]

debates like this make me ::facepalm::


How long are you guys going to argue before you realize that the two items are not mutually exclusive?

You are both right.

From 2006 on, people may have varying opinions on what card is the true RC.

But since McCutchen's RC's came out in 2005, then the "MLB RC logo" discussion doesn't even apply nor have any bearing on the 2005 cards.

The correct answer to the OP's question is Andrew McCutchen's RCs are the 2005 releases...

 

[sportscardtheory]

Andrew McCutchen's RCs were made in 2005. The fact that they changed the rules in 2006 have no bearing on anything pre-2006. His RCs are 2005, you can't change what's already happened, lol.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

I know, but its still fun anyway.

Prospectors are so serious - either about their leagues or their cash, but seldom about their cards of which they're so quick to dispose of.

debates like this make me ::facepalm::

How long are you guys going to argue before you realize that the two items are not mutually exclusive?

You are both right.

 

[blitzerlover]

I know, but its still fun anyway.

Prospectors are so serious - either about their leagues or their cash, but seldom about their cards of which they're so quick to dispose of.

debates like this make me ::facepalm::

How long are you guys going to argue before you realize that the two items are not mutually exclusive?

You are both right.

Why do you hate prospectors so much?

 

[MattinglyAlexander]

why don't you ding-dongs quit fightin'? You know...with shat like this happening to cards....how can you?
I hope the mouse in question died a slow painful death!

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

As I said before, I don't hate prospectors or prospect cards in general, but prospects and prospect cards are simply part of a league(s) that is certainly not the MLB.

If there's something I DO hate, it is a prospector who wants to confuse the MiLB and the MLB simply in order to turn a profit on cards AND does not think enough of the cards to collect them for him/herself. This disgraces the players who have managed to reach the major leagues and cheapens the hobby.

Why do you hate prospectors so much?

 

[sportscardtheory]

As I said before, I don't hate prospectors or prospect cards in general, but prospects and prospect cards are simply part of a league(s) that is certainly not the MLB.

If there's something I DO hate, it is a prospector who wants to confuse the MiLB and the MLB simply in order to turn a profit on cards AND does not think enough of the cards to collect them for him/herself. This disgraces the players who have managed to reach the major leagues and cheapens the hobby.

Why do you hate prospectors so much?

Here's why I think you are wrong; people buying/selling/trading prospect cards have no bearing on your life or collecting habits. You can collect whatever you want, any way you want, at any time you want and other people doing the same doesn't affect you. I don't see "prospectors" complaining about how YOU collect or what you do with YOUR cards.

 

[subject to change]

Without digging through the multitude of points and arguments made in the thread, I'll try to offer a little insight from a (fairly) unbias opinion in this specific case.

In my opinion, the one thing to keep in mind is where cards are going to and coming from at this stage. For the past 4 years or so, I think it is safe to assume that the majority of Cutch cards (or any prospect cards before a player hits the majors) are trading hands from 'prospector' to 'prospector.' I use that term loosely, because I doubt it makes little difference whether the person buying deals exclusively in MiLB players, or if it's a dealer in the Pittsburgh area looking to make a profit at a show down the road...regardless, the intent is the same.

Now that the player has reached the majors, there is likely a new segment of collectors entering the fray. As many of the 'prospectors' are selling, Pirates collectors, prpspective player collectors, Pittsburgh sports collectors, and the occasional every-day fan who wants a baseball card of the hot new rookie are entering the market for the player. From my experience at shows in Pittsburgh, fans are looking for one thing: something that is being called a player's rookie card.

In this respect, the RC rule confusion that was supposed to help 'kids' in the hobby is really benefiting unscrupulus dealers, who can now sell commons from 05 or 09 at inflated prices. For the more informed collectors, they will likely gravitate towards the earliest card picturing a player in a major league uniform, released by a major manufacturer. However, when dealing with player or team collectors, many will not simply want one card. If there are cards from 05 and 09, I don't think it's unrealistic that they will attempt to buy both. I think the earlier cards will always carry a premium, regardless of how Beckett or MLBP defines a rookie card, but there is certainly enough space in the collective wallets of collectors for cards from both years to sell well, and turn a profit for those selling them.

 

[Reyes7tulo2]

So if I go up to the common man on the street and show him two cards of any player who has/had a big league career, one with a RC logo and one without, this man will always want and pay more for the one without the RC logo?

Most people prefer MLB RC Logos simply because they can get a card with a stamped RC Logo for pennies compared to the price of a similar FY card. You can hold whatever belief you want, but simple desirability and market value prove the opposite.

That man should be informed that the one without the logo was released before the RC logo (still in the Major League uniform and still licensed by MLB) and is most likely worth more money. So if he knows that, there is no chance he would pay more for the one with the RC Logo. Simple as that.

I don't know what the big deal is anyway. JoshHamilton you should be happy that people out there are interested in these RC logo cards, because it creates less competition for buying the "first released" stuff. I buy first year/Bowman Chrome cards whatever you want to call it, also. The OP can choose what he wants to collect without having a definitive answer of which is a RC or not. It's just a label. Buy whatever you like better.

 

[Mudcatsfan]

Please. Even if all this is antithetical to your beliefs, you're going to tell me otherwise? No, better yet, you're going to tell me that everyone who would be interested in buying a baseball card can name a minor league player...or twenty.

Your polls seem to exist in an effort to inform people of minor league players, so yes, it is relevant to this post. Or do you expect everyone here to know every player on your list? I don't think so.

What's most important is the following statement you happened to gloss over: "Why on earth would 99.5% of the people interested in buying cards be interested in shelling out serious cash for someone they don't know in a lesser league they know nothing about? " Even if the actual number were 99.4% or even 50%, why would people buy something they knew absolutely nothing about?

Your constant efforts to educate those unfamiliar with the MiLB nonwithstanding - particularly on this board - I'm sorry to say you can't say I'm wrong.

Perhaps this is one of the biggest reasons why you're polling so often here - its an effort to get people to at least recognize the names of MiLB players and stir up interest. I actually applaud this effort.

You continue to think that elite collectors dominate the market, probably because you think of yourself as one... but the number of 'elite collectors' might comprise .5% of people who may be interested in buying cards - on a good day. These other 99.5% of people have no clue about prospects, and are lucky to be able to name half the guys on their favorite team.

Why on earth would 99.5% of the people interested in buying cards be interested in shelling out serious cash for someone they don't know in a lesser league they know nothing about? Or am I making this up.

Just as your effort to completely dodge the question I asked - I'm sorry to say - hasn't gone unnoticed. You continue to pronounce yourself as being in the right without a shred of evidence.

My polls have nothing to do with this thread. Again, I ask - what research have you conducted to back up your claims?

Hey there, i understand your point about 99.5% of people not wanting to spend money on minor leaguers, but that's clearly not what we're talking about here.

This is a case of a player who is establishing himself as a big league star.

We'll agree to disagree about whether a first year card is inherently more attractive than a 5th year card, but stick to the subject at hand.

 

[011873]

Despite what MLB and Beckett say, a players FIRST CARD by amajor company will ALWAYS be considered his true rookie card.

2009 cards with the rookie logo will hold very little value unless they are autographed or very low numbered. For proof of this, just look at Longoria's, Braun's, etc rookie logo cards sans the auto.

Because he hasnt reached super stardom Hobby wise yet, his rookie logo (2009) autos COULD be more or the same as his true rookie card autos from 2005 (Topps Chrome and Bowman Sterling).

Now, should he become a Hobby superstar, his true rooke card autos from 2005 will skyrocket while his rookie logo (2009) autos will go up slightly. Look at Braun, Pence, Longoria, etc fr proof of this.

 

[crosby87]

Another reason I wanted to ask this question is because in a couple years I will need to know if I should go after products with Strasburg and Harper.