Quote:
Originally Posted by Cozumeleno
Someone else can correct me if I've got any of this wrong, but Beckett's Rookie Card designation has always been given to cards they consider the first mainstream card of that player. The Sporting News cards were promotional cards while the Goudey cards were not. Even though they were issued well after his career started, they're often considered rookies because of that.
What I've never understood is the logic used in the case of the Ruth Sporting News card doesn't generally hold true when compared to other players. For example, Stan Musial has pre-1948 major league cards such as the 1947 Bond Bread version. Yet if you talk to most 100 people, 95 will consider his 1948 Bowman his rookie card. If the Sporting News card is Ruth's true rookie card, then there are a slew of key cards for other players that have been long recognized as rookies that really aren't.
I don't have a preference for one over the other, and to me, it doesn't really matter. But there's no industry consistency to these sorts of things.
|
noone in their right mind would consider a ruth goudey his rookie...I don't care what silly logic you use. dozens and dozens and dozens of earlier ruth cards exist...not all of which are "promotional" whatever that means.
I think there are pretty good standardizations for those who collect rookie cards...granted there are exceptions where collectors disagree in some cases...or there are multiple cards considered rookies...BUT...the only question regarding Ruth's rookie is whether it is the sporting news and the likes or the balt news.
Someone is really going to call a card issued 2 years prior to ruths retirement his rookie? that's just dumb and incorrect!