Aaron Judge

[packs]

But the premiums put on the pre-war cards with certain backs is just as artificial wouldn't you say? There's no reason that a Lenox has to be expensive.

[rjackson44]

Hi Peter I'm going to take your advice I got offered insane amount for all but declined hope he goes to the lakers lol

[irv]

Originally Posted by packs

But the premiums put on the pre-war cards with certain backs is just as artificial wouldn't you say? There's no reason that a Lenox has to be expensive.

If I am not misunderstanding your question, it's not only the player but also the rarity of said cards/backs that make them worth what they are.

Something 1 of 1, or something very few people can obtain/own has and will alway carry a premium.

[MattyC]

Packs,

That is a really astute and interesting observation regarding PreWar back premiums and the analogy to some of today's variations.

What some miss is that not all modern collecting is for value and resale, to be dumped/sold when there is a profit to be taken, or to be hidden in shame if value dips. Just as with PreWar and vintage, collectors can collect because we are really into the player. That is, after all, what collecting is supposed to be about.

For example, when I was a kid, I bought and loved Mattingly, Strawberry, Gooden, etc. I bought and collected and loved having those cards not because they went up or down in value in a Beckett or CCP guide, but because they were "my guys," who I rooted for with heart. When I would wake up in the morning, I would check the box scores to see how my favorite guys did. I own those same cards today, and thoroughly enjoy having them in my collection— despite the fact that they are not worth thousands and the players did not make the Hall of Fame.

Funny thing is, as a much older 'kid' now, I do the same exact thing. I've bought both the expensive and non-expensive cards of my current favorites like Judge, Bird, Sanchez, Montgomery, Severino, etc., with the endeavor being to 'Collect'em all' as the hobby saying goes. Does that play into the companies printing variations? Sure. No different than collecting in the 80s played into me wanting an 86 Sportflic of Mattingly or the 84FU Gooden. And the fun and enjoyment is there from collecting a player you like, whether he becomes a HOFer or not, and whether the cards become worth money, or worth nothing.

In my modern splurging lately, I've learned that today we can have many officially designated RC's with the RC logo, and then there is usually a player's earlier Bowman Chrome Prospect Auto card.

Much as there is debate among PreWar collectors over what card is so-and-so's rookie card, the same dialogue exists in the modern realm. Some guys view the Bowman Chrome as a rookie, others view it as a Minor League RC or something akin to an XRC. Some like only cards with the official RC logo for their rookies. And then there are guys who want to collect all the cards of their player.

Similarly, back in '84, there were guys who were satisfied with Darryl Strawberry's 84T. Others felt their collections needed to add the expensive 83T. Still others felt a need to add the Donruss and Fleer 84 issues. I remember encountering the 1985T #1 Draft Pick card of Strawberry, or the 1986T Gooden Record Breaker or the 1986 Fleer 'in action' cards, and I wanted to add them. The same way I see the 1960 style Archives Judge Auto and the 1983 style auto and want to add them to my others. Player collecting, especially of stars, has a long history of leading collectors down a dizzying path— just look at all the cards in a Mickey Mantle Master Set, LOL.

Ultimately, as always, it comes down to, "Collect what and who we like." If someone wants to pay a handsome premium for a Gold Refractor of Gleyber Torres or a Superfactor of Judge or a Lenox Back of a T206 non HOFer or a Pancho Herrer or a centered card that is usually found OC, they should go for it. If a collector buys what he wants and he's happy adding to his collection, it's never stupid or insane; it's always a good choice— because life is way too short and we can't take the cash with us.

[Peter_Spaeth]

What I find confusing about the modern RC designations is that nobody seems to question, for example, that the 1992 Bowman of Mariano Rivera is his RC, even though it depicts him in street clothes and was issued 3 years before he put on a major league uniform. Or the 85 McGwire on Team USA. But many of the same people would say that the Team USA issues of Kershaw, Harper, and others are not RCs, and the apparent rationale is that they were issued before they appeared in the majors. I am sure there is an answer but I don't get it.

And Matt, yeah of course ultimately collect what you like, but debates about value are also an "inheritant" part of the hobby.

[packs]

Originally Posted by irv

If I am not misunderstanding your question, it's not only the player but also the rarity of said cards/backs that make them worth what they are.

Something 1 of 1, or something very few people can obtain/own has and will alway carry a premium.

This isn't true either. There are many sets that are considered "rare" that aren't valuable at all. You need the audience combined with the rarity in order for something to get expensive. Bowman is the premier rookie card manufacturer and its cards will almost always be the most expensive rookie cards to obtain. There's no difference between modern Bowman auto rookies and T206 rare backs. You might say that the T206 companies didn't manufacture the backs to be rare or expensive, but Bowman isn't manufacturing it's cards to be expensive either. The market has decided they're expensive, just as they have the T206 backs. Panini and Leaf put out a million variations too but no one is willing to pay for them. Just putting a number on the card doesn't make it valuable. It being Bowman makes it valuable.

[irv]

Originally Posted by packs

This isn't true either. There are many sets that are considered "rare" that aren't valuable at all. You need the audience combined with the rarity in order for something to get expensive. Bowman is the premier rookie card manufacturer and its cards will almost always be the most expensive rookie cards to obtain. There's no difference between modern Bowman auto rookies and T206 rare backs. You might say that the T206 companies didn't manufacture the backs to be rare or expensive, but Bowman isn't manufacturing it's cards to be expensive either. The market has decided they're expensive, just as they have the T206 backs. Panini and Leaf put out a million variations too but no one is willing to pay for them. Just putting a number on the card doesn't make it valuable. It being Bowman makes it valuable.

If all that has been said in the thread didn't help you to understand, then I am at a loss on how to explain it further to you.

No disrespect. I'm just not good at explaining things I guess so I will leave that to other's who are.

[packs]

There's nothing you have to explain. A refractor is no different than an Uzit except that it has a little number on it. But that number isn't what makes the card expensive. The market makes it expensive. So saying that Uzit didn't know it was making valuable cards is a moot point, because the card is only made valuable by the market and people are only collecting the Uzit because it's different from the base Piedmont.

Also the argument that there are too many cards of players seems moot to me too. Ty Cobb has 4 T206 poses, plus the E90, T216, T215, T202, T205, E95, E93, etc. all released within the same three year span, some of them with the same pose. As much as things have changed, they remain the same.

[MattyC]

Packs, you are dropping some solid points here-- never saw it that way prior to your posts. An example that there is quality, insightful user content on the internet after all!

[Peter_Spaeth]

To me there is a big difference between being scarce as a result of the way history unfolded and being scarce by design to create demand. Just my two cents, even if it doesn't qualify for Matt's praise.

[bn2cardz]

Today it is a business and back then it was as well. If you think they wouldn't have used refractor technology if they had it then I would point you to the t204. When new technology came about they used it.

If you don't believe there was "manufactured" scarcity I would just point you to the 1933/34 Goudey Lajoie as a prime example that there was. (I see this was pointed out before I got back to finishing this comment)

[irv]

Originally Posted by packs

There's nothing you have to explain. A refractor is no different than an Uzit except that it has a little number on it. But that number isn't what makes the card expensive. The market makes it expensive. So saying that Uzit didn't know it was making valuable cards is a moot point, because the card is only made valuable by the market and people are only collecting the Uzit because it's different from the base Piedmont.

Also the argument that there are too many cards of players seems moot to me too. Ty Cobb has 4 T206 poses, plus the E90, T216, T215, T202, T205, E95, E93, etc. all released within the same three year span, some of them with the same pose. As much as things have changed, they remain the same.

Well, although it seems moot to you, the fact remains that people are drawn to rarity/scarcity of HOF's who's card/pictures are hard to come by.
Judge has a ton of RC's. If he only had one or 2, then you would see those prices going through the roof, but, unlike Cobb, for example, people have a ton of other choices, especially if they cannot afford to obtain a true RC.

Also, Cobb is famous for various reasons, while Judge, for example is new and is just starting out. People have him in the hall already, lol, and many are speculating and the prices reflect that, but have him get injured and have a non HOF shortened career and he will be forgotten about as will his cards and what people once paid for them.

[packs]

My point was that Cobb also has a ton of cards issued of him at the same time in various sets, just as Judge does. I pointed out that Cobb has about 20 different cards in any three year stretch from 1909 to 1912, many of which are the same card put out by a different manufacturer. I was making a connection between how cards were issued in the past and how they continue to be issued the same way today.

[MattyC]

Irv— perhaps I'm misreading your point, but who here is comparing Aaron Judge to Ty Cobb? The sheer premise is ludicrous.

Also, your logic— that someone who has a "non HOF" career will be "forgotten"— is pretty harsh and deeply flawed. There are plenty of players who did not make the hall and are beloved by their fans, plenty of numbers retired by teams that aren't in the HOF. It is not HOF or bust for the players, and it's not that way for their fans, either. Maybe for card value speculators, yet that's its own realm.