Quote:
Originally Posted by jefferyepayne
I most definitely agree with the thinking here but I've found there are conflicts that make it difficult to choose one card in some cases. What if there are multiple cards from their earliest year? What if the only image is on *cardboard* but isn't a traditional card (i.e. real photo postcard, matchbook, stamps, etc.)? I personally don't have an issue with there being multiple rookie cards. Other than for the registry craziness, why does it matter if there is more than one?
And yes, some of the decisions made on rookie cards were not good. But don't blame it all on early hobbyists as lots of the newer players have what appears to be an arbitrary card chosen as their rookie cards, probably by grading companies who set the tone with what ends up in their registry sets.
jeff
|
I suppose it doesn't 'matter' if there is more than one, but just as a players rookie year is his first in the big league(s), a rookie card should be the first card. If a player has a card issued in March of year X and another in November of year X, the card from March is the Rookie, whether or not it is common, popular, or attractive. For modern there can be more than 1, because whatever set dropped first will have 30 parallels of that player all issued on the same day. It's entirely possible to have multiple; they should just all be tied for the first card of a player; which is, I think, not relevant to most vintage.
What is a card? I would propose to start the Socratic with: A flat, rectangular piece of cardboard or stiff paper, that is an image driven item, and which does not have multiple 'pages', nor is altered from it's original shape or character to meet such definition.
I would say that a stamp is not, a cutout from a matchbox is not, a picture from a newspaper is not, a postcard is, a CDV/cabinet is. There are plenty of border cases surely, particularly with things like 'sticker cards'. If we are adding modern in, are parralel 'cards' made of metal cards? I think not. An item issued in a pack of cards is not inherently a card in itself.
I am, of course, not blaming relatively early hobbyists for modern, for establishing which "Rookie card" of a player in 2003 is the hot one or the 'one that counts' or is any way, shape or form a "Rookie". Time is linear, but the context here was vintage. Most of the vintage rookies were selected in the 1980's, based it would appear, on what dealers had in stock or were readily available rather than through any process of inquiry. The modern process is hardly more elegant or generally one of genuine inquiry either.