Why don't more people collect Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards?

cardaholic · #1 03-06-2013, 04:03 PM

1. Cost is prohibitive even in low grade for some players - or the supply isn't there (the Just So Jesse Burkett, with 1 known example - and it has been rebuilt -is by far the worst in this regard).
2. There's no clear answer as to what counts as a rookie for many players, mainly due to arguments over whether postcards, minor league cards, Cuban cards, Exhibits, premiums, etc. (and don't get me started on Beckett's refusal to count tobacco cards and caramel cards) should count.
3. Most collectors don't feel the same emotional attachment to players from older eras.
4. Many people progress linearly while collecting - get the post-WWII HOF rookies, and then consider going back further.
5. Lack of knowledge in an area keeps people from starting it.

jimivintage · #2 03-06-2013, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardaholic

5. Lack of knowledge in an area keeps people from starting it.

Knowledge is key. I mean Beckett still puts "RC" on a ton of 1948 Bowman cards and 1933 Goudey cards. Ridiculous! It's misleading to everyone!

HRBAKER · #3 03-06-2013, 04:36 PM

It's hard for me to grasp the concept of collecting something
that no two people agree on what it is. When someone says
they collect T206s, we all know what that is. To me literally
there is no such thing as a Rookie Card, there is what we each
prefer to call an RC if we are so inclined. It's a hobby construct
on which there will never be wholesale agreement. That's
fine for some but I think that is a major contributor to the
narrowness of the appeal of the RC pursuit.

jimivintage · #4 03-06-2013, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

It's hard for me to grasp the concept of collecting something
that no two people agree on what it is. When someone says
they collect T206s, we all know what that is. To me literally
there is no such thing as a Rookie Card, there is what we each
prefer to call an RC if we are so inclined. It's a hobby construct
on which there will never be wholesale agreement. That's
fine for some but I think that is a major contributor to the
narrowness of the appeal of the RC pursuit.

I understand this point of view, and one thing that Phil attempted to do at Oldcardboard is give the collector the first 5 known cards for each player. That has allowed me to decide what I think is the right card to represent that HOFer in my collection. I'd just like to see it organized differently to where things can be separated into minor leagues, first major league card, and so on. It would be tricky for some players given that they were featured on multiple issues and controversial issues, too. Heck, even the 1988 Alomar card varies for some collectors. I personally prefer to have the 1988 Donruss card to represent him because I know it was issued before any of the Traded issues midway through the 1988 season.

I'm certainly open to starting some sort of database that attempts to keep all HOF RC collectors "happy" with options. Since there isn't an exact HOF card for many of the HOFers, then this is just the best that can be done, right?

FirstYearCards · #5 03-06-2013, 04:49 PM

Jimi, I think I have been working on a site that you might envision. For 20 years I have been a Red Sox HOF collector but have expanded to MLB HOF. I have been expanding on OCB among various other sites to put together a more detailed list of hall of fame rookies and prior cards/memorabilia. It's very time consuming and enjoyable.

Like Gary said, there's few who collect these specifically anymore, but maybe it will rebound like it did in the 80's with a little more knowledge in a centrally located site. Bill

http://www.firstyearcards.com/

jimivintage · #6 03-06-2013, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FirstYearCards

Jimi, I think I have been working on a site that you might envision. For 20 years I have been a Red Sox HOF collector but have expanded to MLB HOF. I have been expanding on OCB among various other sites to put together a more detailed list of hall of fame rookies and prior cards/memorabilia. It's very time consuming and enjoyable.

Like Gary said, there's few who collect these specifically anymore, but maybe it will rebound like it did in the 80's with a little more knowledge in a centrally located site. Bill

http://www.firstyearcards.com/

Nice work, Bill! Yes, this is along the lines of what I meant, but still thinking of making a site that would the "mecca" for RC collectors to converse, share, buy/sell/trade their stuff, etc. in addition to the work you've put into the informational side of it. I'd like to see this future site also include categories for postcards, exhibits, cabinets, and more, so that a collector could simply click that button and see a list of each of those subcategories with their respective HOFers. So, say you click the "Exhibit" button. The next page would list and show a gallery of those HOFers who have an Exhibit in their first year (or two), and include a brief caption that might have the rarity of it and anything else we'd want to put.

Sorry, Phil, I feel like I'm highjacking your thread. Didn't mean to get off topic, but I guess in a sense I'm promoting what you're saying and trying find a way to enhance your original ideas. Give it a boost!

bcbgcbrcb · #7 03-06-2013, 04:56 PM

Well, Jeff, we all agree that a '55 Topps Roberto Clemente is a rookie card, no? I don't think that anyone will dispute that.

I think the term is well defined enough in the hobby for collectors to know what it means, there will still be disagreements though.

HRBAKER · #8 03-06-2013, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Well, Jeff, we all agree that a '55 Topps Roberto Clemente is a rookie card, no? I don't think that anyone will dispute that.

I think the term is well defined enough in the hobby for collectors to know what it means, there will still be disagreements though.

Phil,
What % of HOFers is there near quasi-universal agreement on
what their RC card, not cards, is. That's hardly a representative
example IMO. It's like arguing about the greatest player ever,
makes for great banter but hardly a consensus. That's just my
POV, but the lack of consensus keeps it from being a more popular
niche IMO.

paul · #9 03-06-2013, 05:24 PM

Ted, if you ever want to dispose of those grey background 49 Bowmans ...

bcbgcbrcb · #10 03-06-2013, 05:25 PM

BTW nice stuff, Ted!

bcbgcbrcb · #11 03-06-2013, 05:24 PM

Jimi:

I like your idea as an ongoing resource for those of us that enjoy this type of collecting and I would be all for it although I don't want to be the one in charge of setting it up and maintaining it. I would be a daily participant though. Right now, my primary focus is on a Negro Leagues project that I am working on.

As with the small group of Net 54 members that we put together last time, I think that the ultimate purpose of our efforts should be to get concensus rookie card designations listed in the Standard Catalogue and Beckett annual guides and hopefully, a little further down the road, grading company designations as such as well. As long as they refuse to accept that, there will continue to be disagreement amongst collectors and very few will pursue this endeavor.

HRBAKER · #12 03-06-2013, 05:29 PM

Phil,
One other thing, this is a tough place to ask the question. Most of us are
primarily prewar collectors and it's a murkier concept there.

bcbgcbrcb · #13 03-06-2013, 05:29 PM

Jeff:

I think we can get a concensus on around 75% of the 300 HOF rookie cards, more than one per individual is okay (1983 Topps, Fleer & Donruss - Wade Boggs all work, right?). There will be some toughies but if we can get rookie card designations in the card catalogues for 75%, that would be a great start.

HRBAKER · #14 03-06-2013, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Jeff:

I think we can get a concensus on around 75% of the 300 HOF rookie cards, more than one per individual is okay (1983 Topps, Fleer & Donruss - Wade Boggs all work, right?). There will be some toughies but if we can get rookie card designations in the card catalogues for 75%, that would be a great start.

Phil,
That would be a major accomplishment.

glchen · #15 03-06-2013, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Phil,
What % of HOFers is there near quasi-universal agreement on
what their RC card, not cards, is. That hardly a representative
example IMO. It's like arguing about the greatest player ever,
makes for great banter but hardly a consensus. That's just my
POV, but the lack of consensus keeps it from being a more popular
niche IMO.

My opinion is that someone just needs to make an opinion and then just go with it. For example, Barry Larkin has multiple rookie cards, but PSA decided that the 1997 Fleer would be the one to go into their HOF Rookie registry. Once that was done, people just collected that one to fill their slot. This is just like at work when someone has to make the call. I think if someone got a real rookie registry past PSA, and got them to publish it in their Registry, and then the other major registries like SGC and Beckett followed with the same list, it would be done. That would be the definitive list, and people would just go with it. IMHO, most collectors are just followers, and once some group with some kind of authority like PSA or SCD or Beckett decide on a list, they'll just follow it and collect to the list. If someone has disagreements to the list, they can just get the list version, and then also get the one that they want, and publish that image to their slot also. For example, if the Ty Cobb rookie was decided to be the 1907 Wolverine News portrait, and you wanted the W600 Cobb instead as the rookie, you could first get the portrait card, upload that to your slot, and then also upload the image of your W600 Cobb to your slot also. If the TPG's decided that you could have multiple cards fulfill that slot for the player, that'd be fine too. So then in that example, you could have both the Wolverine News card or the W600, whichever you preferred.

nolemmings · #16 03-06-2013, 06:01 PM

Quote:

For example, Barry Larkin has multiple rookie cards, but PSA decided that the 1997 Fleer would be the one to go into their HOF Rookie registry

Then they missed it by 10 years.

bcbgcbrcb · #17 03-06-2013, 06:03 PM

I like that idea, Gary. I tried to get SGC to use my list a few years ago, nothing ever came out of that as they were backed up with other registry stuff that would be much easier to sort out. If any board members have a connection with any of the 3 TPG's that would get this idea accomplished, I would be happy to supply the list and work with them to get it done.

This in itself would be a great accomplishment but I think it would still be far superior if the card catalogues would recognize the rookie card designations. Many more people utilize them as opposed to graded card registries, I believe.

novakjr · #18 03-06-2013, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glchen

My opinion is that someone just needs to make an opinion and then just go with it. For example, Barry Larkin has multiple rookie cards, but PSA decided that the 1997 Fleer would be the one to go into their HOF Rookie registry

Assuming you meant '87. I for one don't play the XRC/RC game with the 80-current releases. For me it's the '86 Sportflics for Larkin. I do have all the '87 releases anyways though. Same for Puckett and Clemens(yeah I know he's not a HOFer). '85 doesn't quite cut it for me, with the '84 fleer updates out there. Which I don't have. I do have the '85's though, but won't count them as RC's..

postwar-79, there's a few exceptions where oddball or local releases may pre-date the traditional RC...I generally accept the hobby standard on those(with some exceptions, like '48 bowman Feller, that's not even close to a damn rookie)..

Pre-war things get even murkier, and I generally just play it by ear. Phil's RC list, combined with the "earliest collectible" list serve as a pretty solid reference.. I reference those lists more than I do anything else in this hobby..

As far as the PSA registry, their list is a joke.

I think a website devoted to them would be a good idea. Maybe some of Phil's(or other's) lists, discussions and photobucket/whatever links. Hell, compile it's own rankings based on completion %.

BTW, right now I'm really enjoying Derek's HOF rookie Image event page..

nolemmings · #19 03-06-2013, 04:59 PM

I'm generally unenthusiastic about rookie cards, especially in the post-war era of players I saw play. Add to that the almost certain extra expense, whether warranted or not, and I have no problem staying away.

I want to see cards depicting the player when he is in his heyday, when some kid would have been most excited about having a copy in his collection. Take Harmon Killebrew--'55Topps or earlier depending on how esosteric you go in defining "card". Killer would not become a regular much less prove himself on the big stage for several years after that card--after many cards were issued of him. I want to see him in a Twins uni during those years he was a force, and those are the cards of him I like most by far. So too with Koufax--do you really think there are a lot of Brooklynites that admired him when his '55-57 Topps came out? I bet not, and any great interest by them in those cards would seem almost odd to me. Finally take Joe Morgan, who had success in Houston and Philly, but who will always be a Red to me-- his '73 and '75 cards are easily my favorites of him. I realize that some make a splash right away and the reasoning doesn't always hold, but in general I want the cards of players in their prime.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Way to Collect Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards	bcbgcbrcb	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	07-03-2012 07:28 PM
SOLD: Lot of (5) Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards	bcbgcbrcb	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	1	06-01-2012 04:08 PM
SOLD: (5) -Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards (ALL SGC GRADED)	bcbgcbrcb	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	1	07-12-2011 09:45 PM
For Sale: Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards	bcbgcbrcb	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	06-14-2011 07:59 AM
Sale of Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards-ALL SOLD!	MBMiller25	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	3	03-27-2010 01:18 PM