Advice on Modern Rookie Cards 2000-2019

[bcbgcbrcb]

Prior to getting into pre-war card collecting during the early 2000's, I was a long time baseball rookie card collector from 1981-2000. Even to this day, I can flip through just about every card set from that time period and identify every significant rookie card, likely not missing more than a single card per set. Since 2000 though, I completely lost touch with who the rookies were each season and today I decided to make a trip to my local card shop in Orlando and see if I could begin slowly trying to fill in the rookie card gaps over the past 20 years. This change of focus was prompted primarily by my recent "retirement" due to health issues and very little money coming in so it's pretty much impossible for me to continue the pre-war baseball collecting.

As I was at the shop today going through modern boxes of loose cards, I had the latest Beckett in hand and was just overwhelmed at how many different sets/subsets that each card manufacturer is putting out each year these days. I was totally confused trying to look up the cards that I had in my hands to see exactly what sets they came from, eventually just getting frustrated and giving up.

After giving the situation some more thought, I decided that the best way for me to tackle this task would be to pick one major brand/set that was around for pretty much the entire past 20 years and just collect the rookie cards that I am interested in from that brand only. So my question for board members here who have kept up with the modern rookie card craze is "what set would you recommend that I can focus on for the past 20 years and go back and acquire most of the big name rookies. To keep it simple, I really don't want to switch brands/sets each year but would rather stick with one choice for the entire 20 year period.

Any input would be most appreciated and I will wait for any replies to discuss further.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Topps Update would be my choice, the Trout is the most iconic card of the past decade or longer and they are extremely popular every year. Not quite sure what year they started.

[Mike D.]

Many "true" rookie cards are in Bowman sets, I believe...as they tend to appear from 1 to several years before other RC's.

BTW, I feel you on the post 2000 RC's. I share your affinity for RC's, and Pretty sure I could rattle off every major RC from 1970-1995 or so without much effort.

After that, though, it gets....muddy. Maybe we can compile a "key rookie card from each year" chart somewhere with some crowd-sourcing?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Many "true" rookie cards are in Bowman sets, I believe...as they tend to appear from 1 to several years before other RC's.

BTW, I feel you on the post 2000 RC's. I share your affinity for RC's, and Pretty sure I could rattle off every major RC from 1970-1995 or so without much effort.

After that, though, it gets....muddy. Maybe we can compile a "key rookie card from each year" chart somewhere with some crowd-sourcing?

The Bowman cards are not considered rookie cards by the current market, because they don't have the official RC logo. That logo now can only be put on a card after a player has appeared in a ML game, I believe. Or maybe it has something to do with being on the opening day roster. I forget. But in any event the same Bowman cards in the 90s would have been considered rookie cards. It's confusing.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The Bowman cards are not considered rookie cards by the current market, because they don't have the official RC logo. That logo now can only be put on a card after a player has appeared in a ML game, I believe. Or maybe it has something to do with being on the opening day roster. I forget. But in any event the same Bowman cards in the 90s would have been considered rookie cards. It's confusing.

Interesting. I haven't followed 2000's rookies closely in, oh, about 19 years.

What do they call the Bowman's that appear before other RCs? The example I often see is Joey Votto, who's Bowman card pre-dates his next RC by something absurd like 5-6 years.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Interesting. I haven't followed 2000's rookies closely in, oh, about 19 years.

What do they call the Bowman's that appear before other RCs? The example I often see is Joey Votto, who's Bowman card pre-dates his next RC by something absurd like 5-6 years.

Prospect cards I think.

[td_cardz]

I would try to start a collection of 1st Bowman Card (base, Chrome, parallels, autographs if possible) as a way to cover the bases/hedge the bet.

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Interesting. I haven't followed 2000's rookies closely in, oh, about 19 years.

What do they call the Bowman's that appear before other RCs? The example I often see is Joey Votto, who's Bowman card pre-dates his next RC by something absurd like 5-6 years.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Interesting. I haven't followed 2000's rookies closely in, oh, about 19 years.

What do they call the Bowman's that appear before other RCs? The example I often see is Joey Votto, who's Bowman card pre-dates his next RC by something absurd like 5-6 years.

His 2002/2003 Topps T-206 card doesn't count?

Votto Topps T-206.jpg

[chalupacollects]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The Bowman cards are not considered rookie cards by the current market, because they don't have the official RC logo. That logo now can only be put on a card after a player has appeared in a ML game, I believe. Or maybe it has something to do with being on the opening day roster. I forget. But in any event the same Bowman cards in the 90s would have been considered rookie cards. It's confusing.

Nowadays Topps usually uses Bowman Sterling to introduce rookies with the RC logo after they have appeared in Major League games... Kind of a pricy box this year with Alonso's first RC card and several others....

[MrPosadas]

I collect modern rookies as well as older stuff but don’t get caught up in the multitude of card variations. I usually hunt down their first standard card and leave the other cards alone. PSA has a future HOF rookie set list that includes Bowman Best, Topps Chrome, and Upper Deck SP rookie cards but I don’t use it to guide my collection because I am happy collecting base rookie cards. It was the proliferation and manufactured scarcity that pushed me away from collecting in the 90s and when I got back into it I chose to focus only on base cards to keep my sanity.

[ALR-bishop]

For Topps, does base include the Update/Traded set ? That discussion has popped up in threads on set runs

The Cardinals gave up Jerry Ruess to get Scipio. It might have worked out well for the Cards but for Johnny Bench

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

For Topps, does base include the Update/Traded set ? That discussion has popped up in threads on set runs

The Cardinals gave up Jerry Ruess to get Scipio. It might have worked out well for the Cards but for Johnny Bench

I was using base to differentiate from all the parallels and variations, not from a set completion pov.

[ALR-bishop]

My Q was really to Ryan's post. Since 1994 I am just a base collector myself, but for Topps I include any Traded/ Update set. There are a few years when there was no Traded/Update sets. Based on prior threads many set collectors would not include such sets as base, but rather a new separate set. Like the definition of a variation there is no single right answer I guess.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

My Q was really to Ryan's post. Since 1994 I am just a base collector myself, but for Topps I include any Traded/ Update set. There are a few years when there was no Traded/Update sets. Based on prior threads many set collectors would not include such sets as base, but rather a new separate set. Like the definition of a variation there is no single right answer I guess.

Since the Update sets may contain rookies not found in the regular set I would think you have to have them.

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

For Topps, does base include the Update/Traded set ? That discussion has popped up in threads on set runs

The Cardinals gave up Jerry Ruess to get Scipio. It might have worked out well for the Cards but for Johnny Bench

I don't remember the Astros 1970 rookies, but I do remember "Rolls Reuss", I don't recall that being his nickname, but that's what my dad calls him.

The guy on the Altuve rookie is Dave Clark. He was the 3rd base coach at the time. I have a Clark game worn jersey that I wear to games sometimes. People think it's "Will Clark"....(not my cards, but I will be getting some modern cards soon b/c they are all over my eBay watchlist now...

[MVSNYC]

Good thread.

I'm a vintage collector (T206), but earlier this year I wanted to add some modern rookie cards, so I read up and asked some questions here on N54, and slowly picked up some nice PSA 10 cards...Funny, I never knew that about the "RC" on the cards, makes sense, and is helpful (although there's still too many choices). I also prefer Topps Update.


PS- Re: Aaron Judge, what's the concensious for his "best" (non-sig) RC to get?

[bcbgcbrcb]

Well, I gave it a shot today and picked up my first couple of modern rookie cards. After looking over a lot of stats from the past few seasons, I opted to do e-bay searches for Mookie Betts and Francisco Lindor rookie cards. I ended up picking up what I believe to be the earliest issues for each, Betts was the 2013 Panini Prizm Draft Pick base card in a PSA 10 holder for $13.00 plus $3.50 shipping. For Lindor, I picked up a raw 2009-2010 Upper Deck Team USA Triple Jersey Relic card for $5.95 w/free shipping.

[Zach Wheat]

Phil,

I focus on Bowman Chrome.

Bowman Chrome has been around since '97. I tend to collect Bowman Chrome specifically because of the rookie cards. Bowman notes a players first Bowman cards by putting a 1st on the card (Draft & Prospect). Bowman Chrome tends to slant more towards international players while Bowman 1st Draft & Propsects tends to slant more towards US Players.