Posted By:
Tom L.I can't even remember how I argued on this issue in the past. That said, the Baltimore News cards are about 1000 times more attractive than the Sporting News Ruth Red Sox cards (which may or may not have been issued in 1915 or 1916) and at least 10x more valuable.
Does that mean that no Cuban card can actually be a rookie (considering they're minor league teams - the issue of fairness is a completely different matter)? First cards yes, rookies no, I guess, by the strict definitions. (I personally don't agree with these definitions for vintage cards.)
For old-time players, I believe rookie can apply to a "rookie" professional on a minor league club just as easily as to a "rookie" professional on a major league team (especially considering: the different relationships between major/minor clubs in the early years; the propensity for many major league players to play on minor league clubs during the twilight of their careers - especially in hopes of managing; the racist exclusion of blacks from major league teams; and the inclusion of minor and major league clubs in many of the significant card sets, including N172, T206, T205, M116, etc.)
And even under strict definitions, you can't even call all of the minor league cards issued of players in these years as pre-rookie cards - Joe Jackson had a minor league T210 after his E90-1, some HOFers had minor league T206s after their major league playing days were over, etc.
Regardless of definition, I'll take a minor league OJ HOFer, a T210 Jackson, a T212/T4/E100/... Weaver, a Mayo Butterworth or Poe, a Baltimore News Ruth and a T205 Collins (the minor league one) any day.