[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

Looking at the tan Jimmy Foxx exhibit (rookie) card which Hal recently posted - I felt: WOW! This was from before he became THE BEAST. I had never seen him pictured so young.

So to me, rookie cards of key players are a great addition to a collection. One (or more) of the early Ruth exhibits really shows a young trim man, starting out - I guess it was the first year he hit 50+ HRs.

I haven't started with these yet, but for me they don't have to be rookies if they portray a youthful star adequately.

As far as "what constitutes a rookie card" though, my vote would be the date that the picture was taken (or drawn, I guess). So if the photo is from a player's minor league days; it is not his rookie card to me; independent of when the card was issued. I would want a players earliest MLB photo shown on a card, even if I have to wait years for it.