Posted By:
Tom LawrieAndy,
All of the catalogues seem to be grasping for their own definitions of rookie as well, but I think that the premium price that often attaches to a true "rookie" card makes this more than simply an esoteric argument.
MLB defines rookie in terms of length of time on a major league roster or in number of at bats. Past a certain point (in the previous year), then a player is no longer a rookie. Applying the same reasoning to cards, there must be a point past which a major league player's cards can no longer be considered "rookie" cards, no matter how many cards were previously issued.
Look at the Nichols Mayo which I mentioned above. His "rookie" major league season was 1890, and yet the Mayo didn't come out until 1895. No way he is a rookie. And it's not his first card, either, as he had several 1889 Old Judges (one year prior to his major league debut). I just don't buy that the Mayo is a "rookie" card. Maybe we're getting hung up on terms. Perhaps the distinction should be "first card" [or "first professional card"] (minor or major) vs. "first major league card."
Tom