A couple of questions, Phil:

-In a case like McCovey, where there are two cards in the 1960 Topps set, are both cards considered his rookie card?

-In the 1975 set, where there is a mini-size as well as regular-size set, are both sets considered rookie cards?

-What are the rookie cards for the most recent inductees [Griffey, Piazza, any others]?

I collect hall-of-famers, and, inspired by your list, I've started to actively collect their rookie cards of late.

Thanks.

Whilst you are waiting for Phil, clearly only the regular issue McCovey and not the AS is his RC, and both Bretts are his rookie from the separate sets.

Griffey has a 1987 Bellingham Mariners card.

Piazza has a 1989 Salem Dodgers card.

This thread, while incredibly informative, led to the very humbling realization that, contrary to my previous understanding, I have, in fact, no rookie cards.

While the Griffey & Piazza cards mentioned are first cards for each, they are both minor league cards and do not qualify as true rookie cards but are instead pre-rookie cards. Griffey has several 1989 rookie cards, with top billing always going to his Upper Deck #1 issue. Piazza's top rookie card is typically his 1992 Bowman, some like his 1992 Fleer Update.

Upper Deck may be iconic for 89 Griffey cards, but Bowman Tiffany is more valuable.

Oh, by the way...
 

I have a 87 Bellingham Griffey Blank back Gem Mint. Any interest? Thanks...

Unlisted RC's--
 

Thanks for your reply, Peter, and your qualification, Phil.

May I take it then that:

Maddux RC is 1987?
Pedro Martinez, 1991 or 1992?
Frank Thomas, 1990?

Phil, if it's not too much trouble,
Could you update your opening list to include the past 2-3 years inductees?

I'm counting seven that aren't listed: Maddux, Martinez, Thomas, Smoltz, Glavine, Piazza, Griffey.
Am I missing any?

And good luck, Sam, on your first h-o-f RC--Hope you've got one of the new ones--

If you are looking for major league rookie cards and not first cards, then you have all three right. I think there is only one option for Pedro, Upper Deck Final Edition, but there are several options for Thomas and Maddux.

First major league card of any hall of famer would be the answer . Topps is usually the first release set every year . But that would answer most of your questions . Minor league card are not rookies . Just look for the release dates on the year of the rookie your looking for .

Correction on Martinez?
 

If Pedro didn't pitch in the major leagues until 1992, then that is his rookie card, no?

My original post stated 1991; sorry.

No, rookie card is first appearance in licensed major league set such as Topps, Upper Deck, Fleer, etc. Many guys have RCs long before their major league debut. The rules about appearing in a set may have changed but back then you could picture a kid long before he played. Pedro's RC is 1991 Upper Deck Final Edition.

Sure, Doug, I'll update my master list over this weekend. Here are the additional HOF'ers to be added:

Maddux, Pedro, Thomas, Smoltz, Glavine, Piazza, Griffey, Biggio, Big Unit, LaRussa (MGR), Cox (MGR) & Torre (MGR)

Is that the rule? I thought the rookie card rule was that the card listed the player on a Major League team? (as opposed to a minor team team or international team)

Edit: I guess these definitions are basically the same except Peter's stricter definition would exclude non-licensed sets like Panini from having "official" rookie cards.

I didn't even know Panini made baseball cards so I wasn't really speaking to that issue.

I can't even follow the really new stuff, I see for example 2008 cards saying Strasburg rookie from major manufacturers but then others from 2010 say rookie also.

I have just updated my master list with the rookie cards for the past three years' inductees which were missing. I have not done extensive research on these as I had in the past because I no longer collect them and have no vested interest other than to help out fellow board members with their collections. If you feel I have made an error, please post here and we can discuss and I can always update the master list again as necessary.

Thanks again to everyone for your interest in this topic.

Phil I assume that where a player has an issue in a regular season set you intended to exclude an update set from a different manufacturer even thought it would be from the same year? E.g. Maddux Fleer Update, Griffey Topps Traded?

Thank you again, Phil--
You're the Man!--

However, where is your Master List located?
I don't see the updates in the list on page 1.
Am I missing something?

This list is to your credit, even more so as you're not collecting them anymore.
You are also the authority on the rules, so I look to you for the final word.

Right at the bottom of his first post.
LATEST HOF INDUCTEES

Craig Biggio (1988 Score Traded/Fleer Update)
Bobby Cox (1969 Topps)
Tom Glavine (1988 Donruss/Fleer/Tops/Score)
Ken Griffey Jr. (1989 Upper Deck/Bowman/Fleer/Donruss)
Randy Johnson (1989 Upper Deck/Topps/Fleer/Donruss/Score)
Tony LaRussa (1964 Topps)

Greg Maddux (1987 Donruss/Leaf)
Pedro Martinez (1991 Upper Deck Final Edition)
Mike Piazza (1992 Bowman)
John Smoltz (1988 Fleer Update)
Frank Thomas (1990 Leaf/Bowman/Topps/Score)
Joe Torre (1962 Topps)

Oy!
 

Thanks for pointing that out, Peter.
I was looking for them in alphabetical order and missed the new additions at the bottom.

And thanks again, Phil.
I see there were several other new inductees that I left out.

I guess it's not clear to me why a 1989 Topps Traded Griffey wouldn't also be a rookie card, for example, since he was not in the Topps regular series. It's still a 1989 card and while it was released later than the regular issue sets from that year, if priority within the year matters we would have to research which of the regular sets was issued first and only pick the first one. Just my opinion.

After 1981, when Fleer and Donruss entered the game along with Topps, more and more sets were produced throughout the year by the card manufacturers. Anything issued during the same calendar year would also be considered a rookie card if a base card (not an all-star card, league leader card, etc.) from a set such as Topps Traded, Fleer Update, Donruss "The Rookies", Upper Deck Final Edition, etc. In recent years, there are so many and all are so plentiful that I don't bother making an exhaustive list. If you are doing a BB HOF RC collection, you may only be looking for one example for each anyway.

So, yes, the 1989 Topps Traded Griffey is definitely a rookie card example, also known as an XRC because it comes from a traded/extended set issued later in the year via hobby sources only.

I don't feel you made an error, but would like to ask why the 36 world wide gum over the Joe dimaggio zeenut? I have heard others claim the 38 goudey is his true rc. I would like to pick up a dimaggio rc but want to make sure I get the one accepted by most as the rc.

Phil in that case I think you may be missing several Griffeys and Madduxes from your list. Griffey had at least a Topps and Score Traded and Maddux had a Fleer Update and Topps Traded. Also Piazza had a 92 Fleer Update.

Jesse:

There are 2 different Zeenut J. DiMaggio cards, one issued in 1934 and the other in 1935. Both picture him in his San Francisco Seals minor league uniform and are minor league cards, thus excluding them from rookie card potential. Both are pre-rookie cards, however, and many collectors desire them more so than the 1936 DiMaggio. You have to collect what you like but if you want to stick with the strict definition of a rookie card, the Zeenuts do not qualify. The same holds true for many other MLB HOF'ers from the 1910's - 1930's, who appeared in Zeenuts sets over the years.

Thanks for the quick response Phil that makes sense. I am a fan of both cards and hope to have one of each eventually. I collect HOF RCs though and a dimaggio rc would fit in nicely.

I definitely get the idea of pre-rookie vs. MLB rookie cards, but then wonder why a card like Kid Nichols' N172 is considered a rookie as it pre-dates his big league career. What makes this different than any Zeenut pre-rookie card?

Will say, I'm more than happy to own either, or both, or many versions of these early cards, rookie or not... Zeenut Dimaggio, 1936 R312 Dimaggio, 1938 Goudey Dimaggio, etc.

Peter:

I knowingly included just regular issues and left out update sets whenever that was the situation. All would still be rookie cards as I mentioned previously.

For the most part all of the post-1948 HOF RC's are pretty well identified in Beckett's price guides. There are a few cases where my choice may differ from theirs, but for the most part, a collector can look up any post-1948 baseball card and if deemed a rookie card, it will have the RC designation in the catalogue. As more and more of the modern era guys start getting into the Hall that have 10 - 20+ rookie cards each, it doesn't make sense to me listing 20+ different choices so I pick a few of the best ones and leave it at that. Again, just about every choice is plentiful and easy to obtain.

The real value in this master list and the reason that I created it was for the pre-1948 rookie cards as almost none are identified in the guides, at least not correctly. When I spoke with Bob Lemke at one time about the possibility of adding some, he wasn't comfortable with doing it so things never moved forward.

Ian:

The Nichols question is a good one and also applies to Clark Griffith in the same way from the same N172 set.

My view on it is that the N172 set, while it does contain a number of minor league team appearances, has a huge following for it's Major League appearances and I consider the overall set to be a Major League set and, thusly, allow the Nichols and Griffith cards to be considered rookie cards. Others have disagreed with me in the past, I could live with it either way, just my choice.

The Zeenuts, of course, were strictly minor league cards.

67 Topps Venezuela was mostly or overall a major league set I think, so why not Bobby Cox?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1933-Zeenut-...EAAOSwUuFWz4lb

Don't see them with a coupon often.

Thanks for the correction on the Cox RC, Peter. I am making the change right now to the master list.

Thanks for the explanation Phil, makes sense enough. I'm not trying to complete anything, nor do I worry about the definitions within my collection, but I do have fun picking up some of the earliest examples of HOFers I can. Thanks to the board, and in large part this list for opening my eyes to some cards I'd have otherwise never gone after--- R315 Hubbell, Chong Rickey Henderson, Dietsche Cobb, Bond Bread Robinsons, etc.

1908 Morgan Bulkeley PC Hartford Bridge dedication?
 

I have both on a auction on the BST ending tonight (nice plug for me) This is the rookie card per Old Cardboard's website?? There are 2 variations to the 1908 PC...

zeenut dimaggio
 

Yep I saw that one and wow!!!
I never liked the Goudey

SCP auctions had a PSA 2(MK) 'throwing' with coupon 4/26/2015 sell for 10,278, which sold in REA in 2013 for 14,220 when it was 1st discovered.
http://catalog.scpauctions.com/1933_...-LOT30683.aspx
Goodwin had a PSA 2(MK) 'batting' w/o coupon autographed 1of1 on 7/30/2010 for 4327.53 it looks like.

I agree, I don't like the big heads and design of the 38 goudey. That zeenut is a pretty cool card but a little out of my range at this point.

Actually, there are at least four variations, but who's counting? Bulkeley also has some pretty cool campaign pins that pre-date the 1908 PCs.

Jacob Ruppert rookie card
 

Does anyone know of what card would be considered Jacob Ruppert's rookie card for PSA's registry purpose? The 1962 Topps card, does not count/qualify for Jacob Ruppert. I have been going back and forth with PSA for 2 weeks now, and they flat out refuse to allow it. They also offered up no other suggestions. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I like this one for Ruppert - a 1901 Cabinet photo. No idea what PSA would consider to be his rookie, but it would likely be a HOF Plaque card or something of that nature.

http://photos.imageevent.com/derekgr...%20Ruppert.jpg

For traditional cards, I would also go with the 1962 Topps. I understand the issue and PSA's position, the same goes for Tom Yawkey's rookie card appearing in the 1959 Fleer Ted Williams set.

Derek's piece is far superior and is one of Ruppert's earliest, if not the earliest, but doesn't qualify as a rookie card.

It's been a long time since I researched this but I recall Ruppert's beer company putting out a premium picturing a couple/few Yankees along with Ruppert. I think it was sometime during the late 1930's, maybe early 1940's. Again, not a card, but a nice option as a career contemporary piece and not as impossible to find as Derek's.

That's fantastic, Derek!!

Agree. Phenomenal clarity.

Thanks Phil, Ken and Leon!

As for the question about PSA, I would suspect that they would consider his "rookie" card to be from the 1975 TCMA 1927 Yankees set, although it appears that only one Ruppert has been graded thus far by PSA.

thanks you and everyone else on this, and you are indeed correct, after hounding PSA and Beckett again last night and this morning, they did claim that the 1975 TCMA is considered his "rookie" card.

Thanks Phil on the insight as always, I am currently having that very question with PSA/Beckett in regards to the 1959 Fleer Ted Williams Set for Tom Yawkey, at least for that one, they were on the fence on and had to do more "research" on, the Ruppert one, they flat out said no on the spot. Ill report back what the response is.

Curious,
 

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb View Post
For traditional cards, I would also go with the 1962 Topps. I understand the issue and PSA's position, the same goes for Tom Yawkey's rookie card appearing in the 1959 Fleer Ted Williams set.

What is the issue? I don't understand PSA's position. Can you explain?
Why wouldn't the '62 Topps Ruppert [or the '59 Fleer Williams] be the rookie card? What is the grading companies' rationale?

Thanks Phil.

Hey Doug:

Although those guys are pictured and identified on the respective cards, they are not solely attributed to them but are looked at more as highlights from Ruth and Williams' careers. Good enough for me, I would stick with those two as rookie cards.

Try to refer PSA to the OldCardboard webpage for Hall of Fame Rookie Cards for Yawkey. Ruppert is not included as he was elected after 2010.

Any updates for the 2017 induction?

How about an update?
 

This is a service message for all members of Net54 who are not familiar with Phil Gary's Hall-of-Fame Rookie Card List.

As a friendly plug, I might also mention that Phil has recently completed writing his "4-Sport Hall of Fame Rookie Cards Guide."
Anyone interested in purchasing a copy can contact him.

Can you give us an update that includes the most recent inductees on this List?

I should be closing in on 100 H-o-F RC's once I get the new guys if they're not too rare.
Thanks, Phil, for your great work.

Thank you for the support, Doug.

For a number of reasons, I am no longer an active collector in the vintage baseball memorabilia arena. I have already sold off my Baseball Hall of Fame Rookies collection and still have a few Negro League pieces left but that's it. I stopped collecting early in 2014 so I have not been keeping up with the more recent HOF inductees nor what their rookie cards might be.

If someone else on the board would like to send me the updated info that would take us from my original 2011 list to the present, I would be happy to add to my master list at the beginning of this thread.

Maybe one day, I'll be able to pick back up again with collecting vintage baseball memorabilia. It was a great 10 year run from 2004 to 2014, including 9 Nationals in a row that I was able to attend. Net54Baseball was a huge part of my daily life as well, providing lots of entertainment and many avenues to further my collection.

HOF rookies
 

Phil -

As a recipient of a large portion of your former collection, I am happy to carry on the research and update with the most recent inductees. In fact, I’ve been doing that for a number of years already!

Thank you for all your contributions to date!!

Phil's great contribution
 

+1

A few proper changes to the list...
 

Alexander.. Hard for me to consider a gaming card a rookie card. I prefer 1914 Fatima/Cracker Jack

Anson...1987 N172 included

Walter Johnson and Tris Speaker... I get it if you want to consider Postcards rookie's I dont.. for me 1909 Ramly/T206 and 1909 T206/Caramel for Speaker.

Christy Matthewson.. 1903 W600 Type 2.. It actually predated Breisch by 6 months.

Wagner.. 1897 Reccius was a promo card.. Still a controversial card.. I respect the Wagner 1902 W600 as Rookie..

Cy Young.. 1890 Ryder Cabinet, 1891-92 Ryder in SCP auction now (first uniform), 1893 Pifer was actually released before Just so. They used Pifer photo for Just so.

Team Cards I also don't count..They were promo for players many times the player didn't even start with the team that year but had a picture in uniform.

Great list..

+2

Anson has many cards prior to his 1888 Old Judge(he was not in the 1887 issue ). The earliest I know of is the 1872 Philadelphia NA composite cabinet.The NA was a major league. He also appears in plenty of Chicago cabinets that predate his Old Judge.

If studio cabinets are included, wouldn't Anson's rookie card be his 1874 Suddards and Fennemore studio cabinet? Here's a link to the card. https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...umbnail-071515

Here's my list for Anson:

> 1869 Marshalltown Team Cabinet Photo
> 1869 Notre Dame Team CDV
> 1871 Rockford Forest City's Team Cabinet
> 1872 CDV/Trade Card
> 1872 Philadelphia NA Composite Cabinet
> 1874 Suddard's and Fennemore Cabinet (same images as 1874 Harper's Woodcut)
> 1874 Harper's Weekly Woodcut
> 1879 Robinson Chicago Team Cabinet
> 1886 Lorillard's Chicago Team Cabinet
> 1887 Buchner GC
> 1887-88 Allen & Ginter
> 1888 Old Judge

I'll be setting up a link to all HOFers and the earliest images for each. I'm pretty sure I have an image for each of the items listed above, but if not, I apologize in advance.

Derek: also 1882 Chicago Photographic Studio team cabinet. I have an image if you need it. Your list confirms that the 1872 cards are his rookies. The previous ones were not major league appearances.

There is a couple different Stevens Cabinets 88-89 I believe.

I've never seen the 1869 Notre Dame Cdv, nor for that matter ever heard of it. Does anybody have an image?

Is the 1872 Cdv/Trade Card the same image as the 1872 Philadelphia Composite Cabinet? I've seen the Trade Card. If it is not the same image, does anybody have an image of the 1872 Philadelphia composite?

There is an 1874 Philadelphia cabinet, as well as 1876 and 1878 Chicago cabinets.

While the 1874 Philadelphia cabinet is Anson's first solo appearance on a photographic card, his first appearance as a professional is on the 1871 Forest Citys of Rockford CdV. Forest Citys was an inaugural team in the National Association, baseball's first professional league.

The problem is we have no clear definition of what a rookie card is.

You consider a W600 a rookie in the case of Wagner, but a postcard isn't a rookie in the case of Wajo? Other than your handle being W600, what logical reason can you give why a W600 can be a rookie, but a postcard cannot? I am totally fine with considering a W600 a rookie card because I disagree with the sentiment that the card must come in packs or be a certain size to be considered a "card." But it seems like a strange position to take when you say that an oversized premium is a "card" for purposes of assigning a player's rookie, but a postcard is not.

In the case of Walter though isn't the postcard in question a minor league issue?

Yes and no. The "Weiser Wonder" is a minor league PC, but the 1908 Rose is not. The Rose pre-dates the Ramly.

W600 was issued as cards for 9 years. Nothing different than any other card company. The sets and years were defined. They were just oversized.Postcards to me are similar to postcards now. People can take pictures with there family and send letters or greetings. If Mike trout had a postcard 1909 or a page in a magazine in those years, they are not "ROOKIE CARDS"...

Cabinet Cards are a bit different. W600 are not Cabinets. Cabinet Card is similar to how cards are made now. Photo with cardboard back. Although, they have defined sets and stature. Cabinet Cards are loose ends a bit. But if the year in the Cabinet Card matches the rookie year to me its his Rookie Card.

It sounds to me like you should probably brush up a bit on post cards before making such sweeping commentary. I think you are confusing RPPC's (real photo postcards) with postcards that absolutely have defined sets and years and are catalogued. Like a W600 is a defined set in a catalog, so is the Rose Co (PC760), Novelty Cutlery (pc805) etc. Real photo postcards, on the other hand, were pics taken by individuals and put onto cardboard. Those do not have defined sets or years. But there is a HUGE difference between the two. I think certain RPPCs are great, but I too am a bit bothered by the fact that they aren't from defined sets or years. I don't own any largely for that reason (though I wouldn't mind a 1915 Ruth RPPC too much). But I do own quite a few PCs from legit catalogued sets. The Rose Wajo is most certainly part of a defined set from defined years. And if mike trout had a postcard from 1909, it would definitely be considered a PRE PRE PRE rookie.

RPPC's can also be from well defined sets like Bregstone, Underwood & Underwood, Rotograph, Cleveland Souvenir Shop etc.

So really two types, private one-off's like Orlando describes above and ones mass produced for sets and promotional reasons.

Hi Corey! I have the 1872 Wright and Gould trade card of Philadelphia. That was the composite I was referring to.

IMHO, Rose Co. postcards were definitely meant to have been collected like baseball cards at the time. If not, I do not think that the set would have included so many subjects. Production began during the summer of 1908 and originally included 12 members for each of the 16 teams, for a total of 192 different players. They were not only offered individually by retailers, but also in team sets of 12. At the time of production, this was one of the largest and most comprehensive "sets" ever made.

Orlando - the "Weiser Wonder" postcard that you reference was actually issued in 1910. The original real photo postcard (without title) that is pictured below was issued in 1907, before he was known by that nickname.

I know you've heard it from me before but absolutely incredible postcard.

Thanks Jeff. Honestly, that means a lot coming from you.

I looked for yours in google, but couldn't find it.

Thanks. That though is the one I am aware of. What then is the second 1872 team card of Anson referred to?

Not sure, but would not be surprised if they are one and the same.

They are the same “card.” In Lipset’s collection forever before he sold it.

Has anyone been able to pinpoint a date of release for the Rabbit Maranville Boston Daily American Postcard? It was thought to be from 1912 for a while, but I've seen some people say 1914 is more likely.

I think that that Maranville postcard is from a one card set that was probably issued in 1914. Obviously, it is a very rare postcard and I have never seen one that has been postmarked. Upon first glance, the 1912 Boston American Souvenir postcards have a similar look to the Maranville, but they actually have completely different layouts as far as the type is concerned. Also, Maranville did not play for the Braves until September of 1912. Plus, the 1912 set only included Red Sox players and were probably issued to commemorate their 1912 championship team. It would make sense that the Maranville card was instead created after the 1914 season to celebrate the Braves’ World Series victory.

Seaver's true rookie card is the 1967 Team Issued Postcard, which was released before Topps last series in 1967

That all makes sense to me. Thank you, Kevin.

I'd say Speaker's rookie card is E254. I believe all of his other appearances on 1909-1911 issues have been confirmed to be from 1910 or later.