2016 Topps Now Aaron Judge --RC, why not?

[Peter_Spaeth]

We probably did this last time Judge was red hot. His 2016 Topps Now cards were issued after he was called up and show him in a big league uniform. They are from TOPPS not some obscure issuer. They are base numbered like any set. Why, other than the fact that Topps didn't put the RC logo on them, aren't they his true rookie cards and not all the 2017 issues? And the logo is meaningless, ironically, his 2017 Topps Now card (he may have more than one) has the RC logo, and there are tons of Topps Nows with the RC logo. Soto and Acuna for example. Is the issue, then, the online distribution? In this day and age that seems weak.

[steve B]

It's probably because of the "rules" about what counted put out by Beckett years ago.

The general gist of it is that the set has to be mainstream which i guess translates to available at retail, so update sets only sold through dealers don't count, regional sets don't count etc. That is probably extended to sold over the internet only as well.
Do any of the ETopps cards count as rookies? It's been so long.

I always read their rules as "a rookie card is a players first card issued, as long as it exists in big enough quantities that all dealers can hype it and readily obtain inventory. "

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

It's probably because of the "rules" about what counted put out by Beckett years ago.

The general gist of it is that the set has to be mainstream which i guess translates to available at retail, so update sets only sold through dealers don't count, regional sets don't count etc. That is probably extended to sold over the internet only as well.
Do any of the ETopps cards count as rookies? It's been so long.

I always read their rules as "a rookie card is a players first card issued, as long as it exists in big enough quantities that all dealers can hype it and readily obtain inventory. "

I would consider eTopps rookies. So does Topps, note logo.

[Peter_Spaeth]

And again, Judge's 2017 Topps Now cards have the logo. But the cards from 2016, issued after he was in the bigs, do not. Zero sense.

[packs]

The Topps Now cards are ignored anyway. I would have thought they'd have great value seeing as they're issued in real time. But no. Nobody really wants them.

[D. Bergin]

In the racing collecting world, Lewis Hamilton's 1st Topps Now issue goes for a pretty decent premium.

[packs]

There aren't too many racing products, which might explain why. But Topps Now has to compete with Bowman and all regular issue Topps products. It has never been the preferred card, even though I think they're cool.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by packs

There aren't too many racing products, which might explain why. But Topps Now has to compete with Bowman and all regular issue Topps products. It has never been the preferred card, even though I think they're cool.

I hear you. Between 2013 and 2017, there's soooo many Aaron Judge cards. I couldn't even begin to pick out what the "It" card would be, or which one I would purchase for myself if I had the inclination to do so...even as a Yankee and an Aaron Judge fan.

[packs]

I hear you too. I have the Topps Now auto rookie from Luis Robert but it doesn’t sell anywhere close to his first bowman and other Topps “rookies” even though it was his first card on literally his first day in Major League Baseball.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Generally speaking, it seems people don’t care about the sequence in which cards were issued during a given year. I guess I get that, although the very first issue for a player still seems a pretty cool thing to me. But I don’t get why the market doesn’t care about a card being issued in a prior season.

[isiahfan]

Well Peter...I feel the same....I don't follow many modern cards.....but I have the same question/issue about Trout. His 2010 Topps Debut card can be had in 9-10 for $150-$300....but his 2011 card...a traded/update is over $1K....makes no sense to me

[packs]

Did someone say 2010 Trout Pro Debut?

[GasHouseGang]

Trout's debut was July 8, 2011, so they don't consider the 2010 cards as his rookie cards. I guess they are pre-rookie.

[yanksfan09]

To complicate things further, Judge also has this card featuring the RC logo from 2016. The only card featuring a RC logo. This was a pretty rare promo redemption card exclusively for Yankees Season Ticket Licensee holders. You could redeem points through the program to get different prizes. This 3 card set in an acrylic frame was one of them.

It featured an image of Judge and Tyler Austin from Judges Debut game in 2016 after they hit back to back homers.

[Peter_Spaeth]

LOL that is great.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Here's an even more inexplicable one, to me. 2021 Bowman's Best Wander Franco. ML uniform, after his call up. Numbered as a base card. His only such issue in 2021. Major widely distributed issue. But many say it's not an RC, either because it has no logo, or (here's where it gets weird) the INTENT was to issue it as a prospect card but it was numbered as a base card by mistake.

Atomic Refractor version depicted because that's what I have but there is a base card.

[isiahfan]

Originally Posted by packs

Did someone say 2010 Trout Pro Debut?

I call BS...draft pick cards (see Jeter) and many of the 1960's-1970's prospect cards were made before the players played in a game.....I think it only has to do with being in the 'main" or "main update/traded" sets

[Exhibitman]

One word: Zeenuts.



I don't see why the Topps Now wouldn't be a RC, BUT without the logo you may as well be pissing in the wind. Of course, there is also the argument that if the prices are low, now is the time to jump on them and wait for the market to catch up.

[steve B]

Probably controversial, but here goes.

I don't know why anyone cares anymore.

Back when it was mostly just kids collecting, yes. A new player wouldn't have a following, and may not have gotten solidly into the lineup until a couple years after starting. Many kids only collected for 3-5 years some even less.

And when the cards got tossed or given away later on if any cards were saved, it would have been big stars and favorite players. So yes rookie cards were a bit harder to find.

But that hasn't been true for decades, at least since the earlier part of the mid 1980's. And many of the most talented players are "ready" almost right away.
So their rookie cards will get saved as a collectible in much higher proportions that in the past.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

One word: Zeenuts.



I don't see why the Topps Now wouldn't be a RC, BUT without the logo you may as well be pissing in the wind. Of course, there is also the argument that if the prices are low, now is the time to jump on them and wait for the market to catch up.

The market will never recognize these low production cards as true RCs for the simple reason that too many people own the millions of 2017 cards the market pretends are RCs.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The market will never recognize these low production cards as true RCs for the simple reason that too many people own the millions of 2017 cards the market pretends are RCs.

You've been talking with the basketball people about the 1986 Fleer Jordan 3rd year 'RC'

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

You've been talking with the basketball people about the 1986 Fleer Jordan 3rd year 'RC'

How that card clings to any legitimate claim of rookie status after PSA decided to grade the 101 is a mystery to me, except that so many people own one.

[GasHouseGang]

Sort of like the 1952 Topps Mantle I guess.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

Sort of like the 1952 Topps Mantle I guess.

But not really, the 101 has a much lower pop than the 86 Fleer.

[GasHouseGang]

Don't you think it has an artificially low population because PSA refused to recognize it all these years?

[packs]

Isn't it a team set card too? I can't think of another rookie part of a team set that is sought after over a main stream product release. Is there one?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

Don't you think it has an artificially low population because PSA refused to recognize it all these years?

No it's because a fraction were MADE (5000) compared to Fleer.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

Isn't it a team set card too? I can't think of another rookie part of a team set that is sought after over a main stream product release. Is there one?

Definitely a different distribution model, but not sure why that matters, it's an officially licensed card and ultimately a base card in a full league set. Not really a card from a team set, like some of the baseball team issues.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Definitely a different distribution model, but not sure why that matters, it's an officially licensed card and ultimately a base card in a full league set. Not really a card from a team set, like some of the baseball team issues.

I thought the Star Co cards were issued by team despite being a larger set.
Sort of like... which year was it Topps did baseball team sets numbered like a full set?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

I thought the Star Co cards were issued by team despite being a larger set.
Sort of like... which year was it Topps did baseball team sets numbered like a full set?

Yes they were distributed in team bags but in terms of numbering each team was not its own set. So I don't think of them as team sets. In a way, just collated differently.