Rookie Card Classification Question

[Robextend]

Hi all,

Question regarding RC designations:

Since John Smoltz and Craig Biggio have cards in the 1988 Fleer Update set and not any single mainstream set that same year, would you consider:

1 - The 1988 Fleer Update Biggio and Smoltz their only Fleer Rookie cards?
2 - Their 1988 Fleer Update cards don't count as true rookie because they are not a standard set, and the 1989 Fleer cards are the true rookie cards?
3 - They are all rookie cards...which is what SGC seems to do, however I am not sure that is really correct and in the spirit of rookie cards.

I know us rookie card freaks can be annoying, but my OCD is kicking in wanting to figure this out so I can properly classify what I collect.

Thanks for helping out,
Rob

[cardinalcollector]

I would count Smoltz's 1988 Fleer update card his rookie and Biggios 1988 Fleer update and Score update his rookies. No 1989s should count in my book.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Rob:

The proper classification to me is labeling the 1988 Fleer Update and Score Traded cards as XRC (Extended Rookie Cards) and the 1989 issues as RC's (Rookie Cards). This practice began in 1981 with the first Topps Traded set. Topps did produce a couple of traded sets during the mid-1970's as well but no rookies unless you count the '76 Willie Randolph (who already appeared in the '76 base set also).

That being said, I agree with Randy that my card(s) of choice for Smoltz & Biggio are the 1988's, I never collected the 1989's.

I would consider the first time appearance in a licensed Minor League team sets, before the regular and update sets to be the true rookie

[bcbgcbrcb]

Minor league cards are typically referred to as Pre-Rookies. Many collectors prefer to collect those as opposed to their first major league counterparts.

[ALR-bishop]

I am contemplating this....pre rookies....extended rookies....rookies.

I had not realized that this area of the hobby was as complicated as deciding what is and is not a variation :-0

At least for Topps and Fleer I think I am ok, however it comes out, since I have all their sets

The pre-rookie is still a rookie than the player's first appearance in a Topps Donruss or Fleer would be considered their first card appearance not a rookie card for those sets

[Beatles Guy]

I'm with you on the '88s, I would consider them the RC. I hated the whole "XRC" thing. Wasn't that something that Beckett created?

[ALR-bishop]

I was only half kidding about the variations analogy. There is no one accepted hobby definition of a variation. I assume the same is true for "rookie card". Just many view points.

I realize prices for the newly inducted folks may be in a state of flux at this point, but of the cards mentioned for these players does one or the other(s) carry a premium over it's "competitors" in the hobby currently ?

[bcbgcbrcb]

When the rookie card craze became big in the mid-1980's, dealers were looking for a way to make as many cards as possible qualify as "rookie cards" hence the XRC, RC, PRC, etc. It's all about making more money, just like almost everything else in the world these days...........

[ALR-bishop]

Agreed, but would not prices indicate how the hobby as a whole leans as to any particular player

[bcbgcbrcb]

You're right about that Al. The collectors will dictate what price a collector is willing to pay for each version, RC, XRC, PRC, etc. The higher prices, of course, will indicate which card is the favorite of collectors.

One other note related to the '80's rookie card craze, it went so far as having a player's first card issued by each individual card company labeled in the price guides as well. For example, Topps first issued a card of Joe Carter in 1985, however he appeared in the 1984 Donruss set. Of course, the Donruss card was his rookie card so the '85 Topps was labeled FTC or First Topps Card. The dealers tried to charge higher prices for those designated cards as well........

[JLange]

I've wrestled with the rookie card defns as well, and have settled on the "First XYZ Card" rather than "Rookie Card." "XYC" can mean anything, such as the first Topps card, or minor league card, or first appearance in your favorite team's uniform, etc. This has been quite liberating for me, as now it is less confusing and can often be answered quite clearly. As primarily a Cleveland Indians collector, it has been quite useful for me to identify the First Cleveland Card of players rather than get into a debate about their rookie cards. As an example, Joe Charboneau's First Cleveland Card is unequivocally from the 1980 Cleveland Indians Team Issue Photocards set. If I limited myself to pondering what his rookie card is, there would be endless debate about which contender from the 1981 Topps, Fleer, Donruss, OPC, Kellogg's, Drake's, Squirt, or All-Star Program sets of that year is perhaps more legitimate. I get to avoid all the nonsense using "just the facts," and answer the question we are all trying to answer anyways.

One challenge I have encountered, though, is that many cards are truly hard to date, including JD McCarthy PCs, certain Team Issue PCs, Exhibit Cards, etc. As more hobby info becomes available, though, more and more of these sets and specific cards from these sets will be dated as well.

[Exhibitman]

The most desirable cards of post-war players are usually scarce regional or minor league issues that predate the nationally issued mainstream sets. You can define it however you want but if you ignore large classes of cards that predate the 'rookie' the whole point of having the earliest card of the player gets lost. I am always going to opt for the Cal Ripken or Rickey Henderson minor league cards over their later 'rookie' cards.

And what to do about Japanese and other foreign players who are now excelling in MLB and are potential HOFers? Do we ignore a decade of Ichiro cards from Japan and annoint his first Mariners card as the rookie? Seems kinda silly.

[rats60]

In the 80s when everyone was collecting, it made sense to have xrc, rc, ftc. However now that that stuff has cooled off, the only thing that makes sense is rc for the first Topps, Donruss, or Fleer card of the player. The supply on these cards far exceeds the demand.

[bcbgcbrcb]

I'm with you, Adam. I also chose to go after first card, whether it was regional, team issue, minor league, etc. Presents some pretty good challenges when you get to Rickey Henderson, Cal Ripken, Ryne Sandberg, Jim Rice, Mike Schmidt, etc. I basically did the same thing with the pre-war guys as well.