Tulowitzki Gold Ref. sells for $306

[Topnotchsy]

I suspect many people are in a holding pattern for all but the greatest stars (like Pujols, any others?) from a few years ago and longer, and I think a lot of people are starting to hold off buying these cards (incl. 2005 BC/BCDP) until they see what value these kinds of cards can achieve long-term and may be happy with less expensive alternatives in the meantime - including newer prospects to flip. There are just so many things to consider long-term and there hasn't been much of a history yet for people to make judgments. Maybe we could use 1998 & 1999 for comparison with regard to low #d BC parallels...meh probably not.

I think the way the card presents/looks like will make a greater impact than the print run for most cards - except for perhaps the 1/1s. Set collectors also drive values, I don't know how many people try to complete BC parallel sets but I'd suspect not many in comparison to other sets.

Just my .02.

Edit: One additional problem with Tulo is that people have to know how to type in his name in an ebay search!

Not certain I follow. Are you saying you thinking prices will go up by then or down?

I don't worry about how Beckett categorizes them. The gold ref's are the "gold standard" and 50 is just not too many. For a random card with nothing to differentiate it's no big deal since a player can have 1000 cards /50, but the gold ref. is a specific one.

Troy Tulo*

I agree that I don't really think that it makes that much of a difference, especially if he continues to play at a really high level.

unique- You think so? I think we've seen what rarer RC cards of big name games get (looking at the high graded stuff and some of the rarer stuff like Tiffany and the like from the 80's.) I also wonder if people think that far ahead. I imagine many buy because they like the player and know that the rarer cards only get tougher to find.

(And we see some of the cards from 1998/1999 Chrome sell really well. The Troy Glaus [a player who is far from hot and not exceptionally popular] /5 refractor RC sold for close to a grand recently, and the gold ref.'s from 1999 sell well.)

eBay has become the great equalizer, but I think that for the biggest names, the best cards have huge potential.

Sure I agree the biggest names can get some coin at any particular time, I said as much above. People are thinking ahead about future value all the time, especially when potential purchases can reach into a few hundred bucks or more and there aren't any other cards to compare the value to.

But the 'tough' cards are normally available on ebay, even with print runs of 50. Maybe not every day, but usually several times a year - which is a lot considering a print run of 50. A couple '05 Tulo gold refs have been available these last couple days alone...one of which is yours apparently

Some of the cards from '98/'99 do sell relatively well, but not particularly well. Troy Glaus was always one of the premiere players of the '98 set, and was one of the hottest players - a premiere slugger nonetheless - in the hobby for several years. He won a couple silver sluggers while young, four AS games, has 320HRs and I know of a couple people who collect the guy. He will appear on the HOF ballot when he retires and will get some votes but won't get in. While I'd be interested in seeing the bids for the #/5 card, I'd think the card would be worth much more than $1K for such a player given how much people normally pay for other cards. Perhaps someday it will reach greater heights, but that seems doubtful, doesn't it?

When a card gets hot it often pops up, but anyone who has searched for a specific players gold refractor (an established player) can tell you that in many cases they are extremely difficult to find. It can easily be a year or more between times that they pop up, and we are talking about cards that are 4-7 years old, I imagine in 5 years or so it will be much harder to find. Just look at Halladay's Bowman Auto. The blue auto might be /1000 or so, but they only show up occasionally and despite how hot he has been over the last year I do not recall one black or gold auto popping up.

As for Glaus, he was a solid player but never really popular and he is years and years from when he was a big time player. The fact a player like that could get close to $1000 for that card bodes well IMO for bigger more popular names.

 

[hofautos]

I suspect many people are in a holding pattern for all but the greatest stars (like Pujols, any others?) from a few years ago and longer, and I think a lot of people are starting to hold off buying these cards (incl. 2005 BC/BCDP) until they see what value these kinds of cards can achieve long-term and may be happy with less expensive alternatives in the meantime - including newer prospects to flip. There are just so many things to consider long-term and there hasn't been much of a history yet for people to make judgments. Maybe we could use 1998 & 1999 for comparison with regard to low #d BC parallels...meh probably not.

I think the way the card presents/looks like will make a greater impact than the print run for most cards - except for perhaps the 1/1s. Set collectors also drive values, I don't know how many people try to complete BC parallel sets but I'd suspect not many in comparison to other sets.

Just my .02.

Edit: One additional problem with Tulo is that people have to know how to type in his name in an ebay search!

[quote="Topnotchsy":1h1ebib8]Not certain I follow. Are you saying you thinking prices will go up by then or down?

I don't worry about how Beckett categorizes them. The gold ref's are the "gold standard" and 50 is just not too many. For a random card with nothing to differentiate it's no big deal since a player can have 1000 cards /50, but the gold ref. is a specific one.

Troy Tulo*

I agree that I don't really think that it makes that much of a difference, especially if he continues to play at a really high level.

unique- You think so? I think we've seen what rarer RC cards of big name games get (looking at the high graded stuff and some of the rarer stuff like Tiffany and the like from the 80's.) I also wonder if people think that far ahead. I imagine many buy because they like the player and know that the rarer cards only get tougher to find.

(And we see some of the cards from 1998/1999 Chrome sell really well. The Troy Glaus [a player who is far from hot and not exceptionally popular] /5 refractor RC sold for close to a grand recently, and the gold ref.'s from 1999 sell well.)

eBay has become the great equalizer, but I think that for the biggest names, the best cards have huge potential.

Sure I agree the biggest names can get some coin at any particular time, I said as much above. People are thinking ahead about future value all the time, especially when potential purchases can reach into a few hundred bucks or more and there aren't any other cards to compare the value to.

But the 'tough' cards are normally available on ebay, even with print runs of 50. Maybe not every day, but usually several times a year - which is a lot considering a print run of 50. A couple '05 Tulo gold refs have been available these last couple days alone...one of which is yours apparently

Some of the cards from '98/'99 do sell relatively well, but not particularly well. Troy Glaus was always one of the premiere players of the '98 set, and was one of the hottest players - a premiere slugger nonetheless - in the hobby for several years. He won a couple silver sluggers while young, four AS games, has 320HRs and I know of a couple people who collect the guy. He will appear on the HOF ballot when he retires and will get some votes but won't get in. While I'd be interested in seeing the bids for the #/5 card, I'd think the card would be worth much more than $1K for such a player given how much people normally pay for other cards. Perhaps someday it will reach greater heights, but that seems doubtful, doesn't it?

When a card gets hot it often pops up, but anyone who has searched for a specific players gold refractor (an established player) can tell you that in many cases they are extremely difficult to find. It can easily be a year or more between times that they pop up, and we are talking about cards that are 4-7 years old, I imagine in 5 years or so it will be much harder to find. Just look at Halladay's Bowman Auto. The blue auto might be /1000 or so, but they only show up occasionally and despite how hot he has been over the last year I do not recall one black or gold auto popping up.

As for Glaus, he was a solid player but never really popular and he is years and years from when he was a big time player. The fact a player like that could get close to $1000 for that card bodes well IMO for bigger more popular names.[/quote:1h1ebib8]

I believe you usually can find any gold or #/50 rookie when the player is hyped and selling.
I also agree with you about halladays cards though...not sure why, but they do seem tougher to find than others.
his gold auto doesn't sell as well as the likes of mauer's gold, or other more recent high priced players, which is probably why people hold them.

A bummer about tulos gold ref is its not an auto...and many rookie collectors prefer to get an auto.

 

[Topnotchsy]

I believe you usually can find any gold or #/50 rookie when the player is hyped and selling.
I also agree with you about halladays cards though...not sure why, but they do seem tougher to find than others.
his gold auto doesn't sell as well as the likes of mauer's gold, or other more recent high priced players, which is probably why people hold them.

A bummer about tulos gold ref is its not an auto...and many rookie collectors prefer to get an auto.

If a Gold Halladay got listed now I would not be surprised if it sold for $800-$1000.

When a player is very hot one inevitably gets listed, but I'm not sure this will hold true in years from now. There are plenty of cards from the 90's that are /50 or /100 that almost never show up and I imagine the bigger RC cards will follow that trend as time goes on (may take a few years.)

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

I think we can disagree here. I don't remember the Bowman autos from ten years ago being that popular when they came out, they seem like the types of cards people don't expect much to get from them if they put them on the 'bay - and most of them seem to sell for under ten bucks. One Halladay 1999 Bowman auto went for $17 recently, the other $53 BIN; apparently book is only $60 - but isn't 1000 less than half of the print run of today's BC autos? This card seems like another example of a card that should be selling for more but isn't.

Glaus was extremely popular when he led the league with 47 dingers his third year and for years afterwards. The guy who won the #/5 was a hard-core Glaus guy if I'm not mistaken, which would seem to indicate it would've gone for a lot less without him. Its tough to price rare cards, but it still should've gone for a lot more. Its not like many people hit well over 300 HRs over a career.

When a card gets hot it often pops up, but anyone who has searched for a specific players gold refractor (an established player) can tell you that in many cases they are extremely difficult to find. It can easily be a year or more between times that they pop up, and we are talking about cards that are 4-7 years old, I imagine in 5 years or so it will be much harder to find. Just look at Halladay's Bowman Auto. The blue auto might be /1000 or so, but they only show up occasionally and despite how hot he has been over the last year I do not recall one black or gold auto popping up.

As for Glaus, he was a solid player but never really popular and he is years and years from when he was a big time player. The fact a player like that could get close to $1000 for that card bodes well IMO for bigger more popular names.

 

[Topnotchsy]

But the 1999 Bowman auto is not his RC Auto. The 1997 one is. Glaus may have been popular, but I can name 50 players playing now who would have sold for more had their card been a RC /5 for that long ago.

I think we can disagree here. I don't remember the Bowman autos from ten years ago being that popular when they came out, they seem like the types of cards people don't expect much to get from them if they put them on the 'bay - and most of them seem to sell for under ten bucks. One Halladay 1999 Bowman auto went for $17 recently, the other $53 BIN; apparently book is only $60 - but isn't 1000 less than half of the print run of today's BC autos? This card seems like another example of a card that should be selling for more but isn't.

Glaus was extremely popular when he led the league with 47 dingers his third year and for years afterwards. The guy who won the #/5 was a hard-core Glaus guy if I'm not mistaken, which would seem to indicate it would've gone for a lot less without him. Its tough to price rare cards, but it still should've gone for a lot more. Its not like many people hit well over 300 HRs over a career.

When a card gets hot it often pops up, but anyone who has searched for a specific players gold refractor (an established player) can tell you that in many cases they are extremely difficult to find. It can easily be a year or more between times that they pop up, and we are talking about cards that are 4-7 years old, I imagine in 5 years or so it will be much harder to find. Just look at Halladay's Bowman Auto. The blue auto might be /1000 or so, but they only show up occasionally and despite how hot he has been over the last year I do not recall one black or gold auto popping up.

As for Glaus, he was a solid player but never really popular and he is years and years from when he was a big time player. The fact a player like that could get close to $1000 for that card bodes well IMO for bigger more popular names.

 

[hofautos]

I think we can disagree here. I don't remember the Bowman autos from ten years ago being that popular when they came out, they seem like the types of cards people don't expect much to get from them if they put them on the 'bay - and most of them seem to sell for under ten bucks. One Halladay 1999 Bowman auto went for $17 recently, the other $53 BIN; apparently book is only $60 - but isn't 1000 less than half of the print run of today's BC autos? This card seems like another example of a card that should be selling for more but isn't.

Glaus was extremely popular when he led the league with 47 dingers his third year and for years afterwards. The guy who won the #/5 was a hard-core Glaus guy if I'm not mistaken, which would seem to indicate it would've gone for a lot less without him. Its tough to price rare cards, but it still should've gone for a lot more. Its not like many people hit well over 300 HRs over a career.

When a card gets hot it often pops up, but anyone who has searched for a specific players gold refractor (an established player) can tell you that in many cases they are extremely difficult to find. It can easily be a year or more between times that they pop up, and we are talking about cards that are 4-7 years old, I imagine in 5 years or so it will be much harder to find. Just look at Halladay's Bowman Auto. The blue auto might be /1000 or so, but they only show up occasionally and despite how hot he has been over the last year I do not recall one black or gold auto popping up.

As for Glaus, he was a solid player but never really popular and he is years and years from when he was a big time player. The fact a player like that could get close to $1000 for that card bodes well IMO for bigger more popular names.

I think we were talking about the 1997 halladay auto...you won't find his gold for $17 (grin).

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

Oh right, I forgot! Burbank lists 50 gold autos from 1997 bowman, the most expensive of which is a Miguel Tejada, another 300 HR guy but as a shortstop/possible HOFer, for $342 but all the rest for $27 except for a Billy Wagner for $137 (which seems more than a bit too high). Its just not that impressive, especially since this is Burbank pricing.

Just like there may only be several players between 1995-2000 whose #/5 might reach $1K now, there may be just a handful of today's players that may reach $1K ten years from *now*. There simply aren't 25-35 current players today who, for example, will have hit 300 HRs in their careers for your 50 player projection to come true unless there's runaway inflation or something.

But the 1999 Bowman auto is not his RC Auto. The 1997 one is. Glaus may have been popular, but I can name 50 players playing now who would have sold for more had their card been a RC /5 for that long ago.

 

[Topnotchsy]

Hard to compare Tejada because between the 'roids and his lackluster performance over the last few years, he's also been ice cold.

I think it's safe to say that there were far fewer impact players who debuted from 1997-1999 and 2000-2005 or so. The early Chrome years had just a couple big names but 2000 had Miguel Cabrera, 2001 Pujols, Ichiro, Teixeira etc. Look at the sets, those were just really lean years.

Oh right, I forgot! Burbank lists 50 gold autos from 1997 bowman, the most expensive of which is a Miguel Tejada, another 300 HR guy but as a shortstop/possible HOFer, for $342 but all the rest for $27 except for a Billy Wagner for $137 (which seems more than a bit too high). Its just not that impressive, especially since this is Burbank pricing.

Just like there may only be several players between 1995-2000 whose #/5 might reach $1K now, there may be just a handful of today's players that may reach $1K ten years from *now*. There simply aren't 25-35 current players today who, for example, will have hit 300 HRs in their careers for your 50 player projection to come true unless there's runaway inflation or something.

But the 1999 Bowman auto is not his RC Auto. The 1997 one is. Glaus may have been popular, but I can name 50 players playing now who would have sold for more had their card been a RC /5 for that long ago.

 

[hofautos]

Oh right, I forgot! Burbank lists 50 gold autos from 1997 bowman, the most expensive of which is a Miguel Tejada, another 300 HR guy but as a shortstop/possible HOFer, for $342 but all the rest for $27 except for a Billy Wagner for $137 (which seems more than a bit too high). Its just not that impressive, especially since this is Burbank pricing.

Just like there may only be several players between 1995-2000 whose #/5 might reach $1K now, there may be just a handful of today's players that may reach $1K ten years from *now*. There simply aren't 25-35 current players today who, for example, will have hit 300 HRs in their careers for your 50 player projection to come true unless there's runaway inflation or something.

But the 1999 Bowman auto is not his RC Auto. The 1997 one is. Glaus may have been popular, but I can name 50 players playing now who would have sold for more had their card been a RC /5 for that long ago.

you can't compare non-rookies to rookies, and Tejada is the only rookie and he is not really collected since roids and padres.
The halladay is the only really desired card in the set, so you really can't compare any others to it. That would be like comparing a 2001 chrome auto pujols to any other player in the set.

I still agree though that you usually can find any #/50 rookie card when a player is hot and selling.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

Oh right, I forgot! Burbank lists 50 gold autos from 1997 bowman, the most expensive of which is a Miguel Tejada, another 300 HR guy but as a shortstop/possible HOFer, for $342 but all the rest for $27 except for a Billy Wagner for $137 (which seems more than a bit too high). Its just not that impressive, especially since this is Burbank pricing.

Just like there may only be several players between 1995-2000 whose #/5 might reach $1K now, there may be just a handful of today's players that may reach $1K ten years from *now*. There simply aren't 25-35 current players today who, for example, will have hit 300 HRs in their careers for your 50 player projection to come true unless there's runaway inflation or something.

But the 1999 Bowman auto is not his RC Auto. The 1997 one is. Glaus may have been popular, but I can name 50 players playing now who would have sold for more had their card been a RC /5 for that long ago.

you can't compare non-rookies to rookies, and Tejada is the only rookie and he is not really collected since roids and padres.
The halladay is the only really desired card in the set, so you really can't compare any others to it. That would be like comparing a 2001 chrome auto pujols to any other player in the set.

I still agree though that you usually can find any #/50 rookie card when a player is hot and selling.

With the possible exception of a couple players, it seems all the players in the set were all minor leaguers or rookies in 1997, I think its an apt comparison particularly if Bowman is the main brand being considered. Its a bigger set than I thought.

While Tejada has been tainted, he was an all-star the previous two years and received MVP votes recently. But it doesn't matter, he's an example of something unexpected that could happen to what was considered a great star, he's shows how difficult and risky it is to be able to predict the future.

 

[hofautos]

Here's a TULO for you....

$600 and not over yet...

http://cgi.ebay.com/TROY-TULOWITZKI...0472048596?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item4cf1ab47d4

 

[hofautos]

Oh right, I forgot! Burbank lists 50 gold autos from 1997 bowman, the most expensive of which is a Miguel Tejada, another 300 HR guy but as a shortstop/possible HOFer, for $342 but all the rest for $27 except for a Billy Wagner for $137 (which seems more than a bit too high). Its just not that impressive, especially since this is Burbank pricing.

Just like there may only be several players between 1995-2000 whose #/5 might reach $1K now, there may be just a handful of today's players that may reach $1K ten years from *now*. There simply aren't 25-35 current players today who, for example, will have hit 300 HRs in their careers for your 50 player projection to come true unless there's runaway inflation or something.

But the 1999 Bowman auto is not his RC Auto. The 1997 one is. Glaus may have been popular, but I can name 50 players playing now who would have sold for more had their card been a RC /5 for that long ago.

you can't compare non-rookies to rookies, and Tejada is the only rookie and he is not really collected since roids and padres.
The halladay is the only really desired card in the set, so you really can't compare any others to it. That would be like comparing a 2001 chrome auto pujols to any other player in the set.

I still agree though that you usually can find any #/50 rookie card when a player is hot and selling.

With the possible exception of a couple players, it seems all the players in the set were all minor leaguers or rookies in 1997, I think its an apt comparison particularly if Bowman is the main brand being considered. Its a bigger set than I thought.

While Tejada has been tainted, he was an all-star the previous two years and received MVP votes recently. But it doesn't matter, he's an example of something unexpected that could happen to what was considered a great star, he's shows how difficult and risky it is to be able to predict the future.

I don't think there is much desire for Tejada currently, and imho, the only cards in the set with any real interest would be vladdy, jeter and halladay, halladay being the only rookie of the three.

 

[Mudcatsfan]

Oh right, I forgot! Burbank lists 50 gold autos from 1997 bowman, the most expensive of which is a Miguel Tejada, another 300 HR guy but as a shortstop/possible HOFer, for $342 but all the rest for $27 except for a Billy Wagner for $137 (which seems more than a bit too high). Its just not that impressive, especially since this is Burbank pricing.

Just like there may only be several players between 1995-2000 whose #/5 might reach $1K now, there may be just a handful of today's players that may reach $1K ten years from *now*. There simply aren't 25-35 current players today who, for example, will have hit 300 HRs in their careers for your 50 player projection to come true unless there's runaway inflation or something.

But the 1999 Bowman auto is not his RC Auto. The 1997 one is. Glaus may have been popular, but I can name 50 players playing now who would have sold for more had their card been a RC /5 for that long ago.

you can't compare non-rookies to rookies, and Tejada is the only rookie and he is not really collected since roids and padres.
The halladay is the only really desired card in the set, so you really can't compare any others to it. That would be like comparing a 2001 chrome auto pujols to any other player in the set.

I still agree though that you usually can find any #/50 rookie card when a player is hot and selling.

With the possible exception of a couple players, it seems all the players in the set were all minor leaguers or rookies in 1997, I think its an apt comparison particularly if Bowman is the main brand being considered. Its a bigger set than I thought.

While Tejada has been tainted, he was an all-star the previous two years and received MVP votes recently. But it doesn't matter, he's an example of something unexpected that could happen to what was considered a great star, he's shows how difficult and risky it is to be able to predict the future.

I don't think there is much desire for Tejada currently, and imho, the only cards in the set with any real interest would be vladdy, jeter and halladay, halladay being the only rookie of the three.

The vladdy is indeed nice. One problem with the gold autos in that set is that they didn't look all that great. Terrible gold pens.

I think the Halladay 97 gold would easily clear 800 right now if not well over 1000 if the PHils win the series.

I think 1000 is a bit of a hard number to clear when we're in tough times and these are in fact baseball cards.

 

[VizquelCollector.com]

But I do see Tulo play nearly every game, and I don't need to see anybody else to know what I actually see with Tulo -- he's the best defensive SS I've seen since Ozzie Smith. And yes, he's better than Omar Vizquel. By miles.

Are you saying you think he's defensively better by miles than Omar today?

 

[Topnotchsy]

But I do see Tulo play nearly every game, and I don't need to see anybody else to know what I actually see with Tulo -- he's the best defensive SS I've seen since Ozzie Smith. And yes, he's better than Omar Vizquel. By miles.

Are you saying you think he's defensively better by miles than Omar today?

He feels he's the best since Ozzie so I assume he means in his prime. (Not commenting on the statement itself as I have not clue who is/was better.)

 

[ccouch (Chad)]

But I do see Tulo play nearly every game, and I don't need to see anybody else to know what I actually see with Tulo -- he's the best defensive SS I've seen since Ozzie Smith. And yes, he's better than Omar Vizquel. By miles.

Are you saying you think he's defensively better by miles than Omar today?

He feels he's the best since Ozzie so I assume he means in his prime. (Not commenting on the statement itself as I have not clue who is/was better.)

I meant that I believe that Tulowitzki is better defensively than Vizquel was in his prime. What I probably should have said that is that I believe that Tulowitzki is more IMPACTFUL defensively than Vizquel ever was. Tulowitzki's range factor shows that he makes plays that no other shortstop makes, and since he makes them look easy, they don't show up on SportsCenter's Top 10 every night.

I'll tread lightly because I mean no disrespect to Vizquel. He's always been incredibly solid and I do believe he's a HOF shortstop. But I believe that Vizquel's tendency to make the spectacular play has caused people who really don't look at the numbers to overstate how impactful he was defensively. Yes, he made very few errors and made a bunch of spectacular plays. But what really makes an impact is the 95% of plays that are "in the middle".

I'm not going to sit here and cite numbers -- they are easily accessible on www.baseballreference.com. But if one just looks at Vizquel's season-by-season numbers from a range-factor and assist standpoint, he was very rarely ever the best in the LEAGUE in any particular year. And that has to count for something, right?

 

[All The Hype]

To touch on the availability of "rare" cards subject...

I think that as time goes by, more and more cards from a particular set, especially of popular players, will find permanent homes in collectors' hands. While some people buy to flip, others do not, which means that when these people get hold of a card, there is a 99% chance it will not end up on eBay again.



I recently picked up a Justin Verlander 2005 Bowman Chrome Gold Refractor Auto #/50. There have been a handful of these on eBay with impossibly high BIN prices here and there, but rarely do they get listed auction style. So while they are out there, I'm not sure who in their right mind would pay $800+ for this card right now when the going rate is realistically in the $300-$500 range.

Point of that is to say that even though they're technically "available", there are realistically only maybe one or two, maybe three chances per year to win one of these in auction (and therefore, at market price). This is a card that is five years old and of a guy who has been one of the more dominant pitchers in baseball the last few years.

I think that as years pass, these will become harder and harder to find which will leave collectors scrambling to make sure they are the one who makes the winning bid, which hypothetically should lead to higher prices. Economics 101: Same demand, lower supply equates to a higher price.

Where a card like that will cap? Who knows. It certainly helps if the player continues to perform at a high level on the field.

 

[VizquelCollector.com]

http://www.baseballreference.com[/url]. But if one just looks at Vizquel's season-by-season numbers from a range-factor and assist standpoint, he was very rarely ever the best in the LEAGUE in any particular year. And that has to count for something, right?[/quote:3aozcl90]

I hear you, no offense taken, and maybe Tulowitzki is better or will have a better career. There have been some spectacular shortstops in the last couple decades, some with great careers. Either way, I think better "by miles" is a reach!

 

[hofautos]

To touch on the availability of "rare" cards subject...

I think that as time goes by, more and more cards from a particular set, especially of popular players, will find permanent homes in collectors' hands. While some people buy to flip, others do not, which means that when these people get hold of a card, there is a 99% chance it will not end up on eBay again.



I recently picked up a Justin Verlander 2005 Bowman Chrome Gold Refractor Auto #/50. There have been a handful of these on eBay with impossibly high BIN prices here and there, but rarely do they get listed auction style. So while they are out there, I'm not sure who in their right mind would pay $800+ for this card right now when the going rate is realistically in the $300-$500 range.

Point of that is to say that even though they're technically "available", there are realistically only maybe one or two, maybe three chances per year to win one of these in auction (and therefore, at market price). This is a card that is five years old and of a guy who has been one of the more dominant pitchers in baseball the last few years.

I think that as years pass, these will become harder and harder to find which will leave collectors scrambling to make sure they are the one who makes the winning bid, which hypothetically should lead to higher prices. Economics 101: Same demand, lower supply equates to a higher price.

Where a card like that will cap? Who knows. It certainly helps if the player continues to perform at a high level on the field.

I think most people would be happy with any nice refractor of a player they want....sure a red or super would be nice, but with so many out there, i really think there will always be a rare one or two available when a player is hot and in the news.

When you think many players have a red, blue, orange, gold, regular and then non-refractors as well...it's really no big deal...they are one in 500 and there will always be some available. Even as hot and desirable as pujols is, you seem to always be able to find several a year....

 

[hofautos]

http://www.baseballreference.com[/url]. But if one just looks at Vizquel's season-by-season numbers from a range-factor and assist standpoint, he was very rarely ever the best in the LEAGUE in any particular year. And that has to count for something, right?

I hear you, no offense taken, and maybe Tulowitzki is better or will have a better career. There have been some spectacular shortstops in the last couple decades, some with great careers. Either way, I think better "by miles" is a reach![/quote:1nap10r6]

Tulo and omar shouldn't even be in the same sentence until tulo has 10 good years in.