Let's talk about "over-looked" true Rookie cards....Pre-war and early Post-war

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by grandcards

This is my favorite example that lays bare how silly even the most ardent "True RC" arguments are. As far as I can tell, there is absolute consensus that 1993 Topps is Jeter's rookie card, despite the fact that he made his debut with the Yankees in 1995.

Heck, Carl Yastrzemski made his Major League debut in 1961 -- something that I didn't even know because I had always assumed it was 1960 because of his Rookie Card! (also accepted as such by consensus)

Close, but not absolute consensus. I personally make zero exceptions to the rule that a card issued in a year earlier than one's major league debut is not a rookie card. Jeter happens to have many minor league cards, and some of them happen to be popular in part because some of his minor league uniforms were indistinguishable from New York Yankee uniforms, but his MLB debut was 1995, and I (even if no one else goes along with it) regard his 1995 cards as his true rookie cards. I will die on this hill.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

Close, but not absolute consensus. I personally make zero exceptions to the rule that a card issued in a year earlier than one's major league debut is not a rookie card. Jeter happens to have many minor league cards, and some of them happen to be popular in part because some of his minor league uniforms were indistinguishable from New York Yankee uniforms, but his MLB debut was 1995, and I (even if no one else goes along with it) regard his 1995 cards as his true rookie cards. I will die on this hill.

It's logical but the hobby consensus at the time was first card in a big league set. Thus the 93 Jeters, 92 Mariano, and many more from that era.

[packs]

My personal rule for dealing with modern is that if the card you're on refers to you as a prospect in some way then that's not your rookie card, whether it appears in a major league set or not. You are still a minor leaguer and nobody becomes a major league rookie until they debut.

First Bowman cards are almost always part of a prospect subset. Many early 90s Topps cards referred to the players as draft picks, etc. You don't become a rookie when you get drafted. You become a minor leaguer. Your true rookie card is the first card issued of you after you make your major league debut.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

My personal rule for dealing with modern is that if the card you're on refers to you as a prospect in some way then that's not your rookie card, whether it appears in a major league set or not. You are still a minor leaguer and nobody becomes a major league rookie until they debut.

First Bowman cards are almost always part of a prospect subset. Many early 90s Topps cards referred to the players as draft picks, etc. Your true rookie card is the first card issued of you after you make your major league debut.

So 60 Topps is not Yaz' rookie, that's hard to take.

[packs]

No. His rookie card is 1961 Topps. His 1960 card is of a minor leaguer.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

No. His rookie card is 1961 Topps. His 1960 card is of a minor leaguer.

What percentage of the hobby do you think agrees with you?

[packs]

They don't have to agree with me if they can explain how a player who never appeared in a major league game is considered a rookie.