Minor league cards

[Lucas00]

As more and more people open their minds to things other than topps/bowman (very common cards) they realize their own collections are very streamlined and in some ways not unique. Of course there is no problem with that. But for people who eventually get those thoughts, the general next step is going for memorabilia that is unique, scarce, rare.
Pre war you will see has adopted this thought process decades ago, getting pre rookie or early hof material of pre war greats is almost impossible and if possible you seriously have to be a millionaire to consider collecting.

As it is now, in particular 50s and 60s pre rookie issues are in my opinion extremely undervalued. And many multiple 100 times rarer than their rookie standard counterparts.

I'll give one quick example of one of the craziest. Stan Musials M114, an issue of one of the top 5 best hitters of all time that is 5 years before his "rookie card" goes for under $200 and often times under $100. That is comical. You can get original photos that are many times one of a kind for a fraction of a topps rookie card that quite literally is a dime a dozen.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

As more and more people open their minds to things other than topps/bowman (very common cards) they realize their own collections are very streamlined and in some ways not unique. Of course there is no problem with that. But for people who eventually get those thoughts, the general next step is going for memorabilia that is unique, scarce, rare.
Pre war you will see has adopted this thought process decades ago, getting pre rookie or early hof material of pre war greats is almost impossible and if possible you seriously have to be a millionaire to consider collecting.

As it is now, in particular 50s and 60s pre rookie issues are in my opinion extremely undervalued. And many multiple 100 times rarer than their rookie standard counterparts.

I'll give one quick example of one of the craziest. Stan Musials M114, an issue of one of the top 5 best hitters of all time that is 5 years before his "rookie card" goes for under $200 and often times under $100. That is comical.

Right but I thought he was asking about modern cards.

[bk400]

I thought the lessons might apply more broadly to modern, where minor league cards haven't been subjected to the cynical strategy of manufactured scarcity employed by the major card companies.

This said, I do find the Stan Musial M114 very intriguing, though I'm struggling with the notion that that is a card. Along the same lines, the 1946 Musial Montiel is probably very underpriced relative to the mainline 1948 rookie cards given its scarcity. But people do say that the 46 Montiel is a major league card since he's in a Cardinals uniform.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bk400

I thought the lessons might apply more broadly to modern, where minor league cards haven't been subjected to the cynical strategy of manufactured scarcity employed by the major card companies.

This said, I do find the Stan Musial M114 very intriguing, though I'm struggling with the notion that that is a card. Along the same lines, the 1946 Musial Montiel is probably very underpriced relative to the mainline 1948 rookie cards given its scarcity. But people do say that the 46 Montiel is a major league card since he's in a Cardinals uniform.

After all the decades, I'd personally be wary of claims that certain cards are "underpriced," players are "underrated/undervalued," etc. The hobby reflects the collective judgments of many many people over many many years and it's anyone's guess what is going to become hot when. I mean ten years from now we'll probably be talking about how Spahn and Musial and Eddie Collins are undervalued, just as we were ten years ago. As a dealer friend famously told me, Pete, sometimes the only thing scarcer than the supply is the demand.

[Casey2296]

-
A bit OT but I would love to see the Goblin Merrymint O.H. Melville (Mel Ott) come to auction.
It's a fascinating card that is arguably a pre 1929 rookie card.
-

[Lucas00]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Right but I thought he was asking about modern cards.

Tried to make that tangent relevant as to why the OP thinks modern pre rookie cards are undervalued but I probably failed lol.


In terms of modern pre rookies it's just the fact, in modern times (I would say mid 80s onward) people have taken collectibles seriously, and that means keeping them. The whole reason pre rookies from long past are so cool is because they are very rare, for every 500 Jim Palmer topps rookies there's 1 team issue rookie. For modern it just isn't that way anymore. The palmer team issue could sell for 10 grand tomorrow and sure some would come out of the woodwork to cash in. But not that many, because they are truly rare.

Take a pre issue of somebody like Albert Pujols, and say it sells for a crazy amount. The market is going to flood.. Instantly. Because people have waited for that moment and remembered "I have that card somewhere" and even though an Albert Pujols pre rookie is probably far rarer than a topps, its just not near rare enough. So I guess my final thought is rare=cool haha. No but seriously, a modern pre issue would have to be something extremely scarce, like given away at a minor league park one game kind of thing.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

, for every 500 Jim Palmer topps rookies there's 1 team issue rookie. For modern it just isn't that way anymore.

Barry Larkin's most expensive 1986 RC is the team issued Kahn's. They sell for $50 - $100 in raw condition. Very very hard to find in Gem condition since it was a low budget team issue.



Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[Cubanball]

The way I organize my PC of Cuban born players is as follows. For pre-1949 players I simply seek out the players first card or as close as I can come to their first card. I define a first card as the first card, postcard, premium or team issue that pictures the player only or in multiple player cards like the Topps Rookies cards (leaders and team cards are not included). For post-1949 players I seek out their first card, next their first minor league card and their first rookie card(s). I define Rookie card as their first card picturing the player in a Major League uniform. For players with multiple cards produced in their first year I go with the more traditional definition and include only their cards from the major sets. An example pictured below is Minnie Miñoso. His first card is his 1945-46 Caramelo Deportivo, his first Minor league card is his 1950 Hage's Dairy, and his rookie card(s) are his 1952 Bowman and 1952 Topps.

As for Minor League cards I wanted to point out that there are two Cuban produced sets that picture players in Minor league teams. The sets are the 1946 Propagandas Montiel La Ambrosia set and the 1946 Propagandas Montiel Reyes del Deporte set which picture players from the Florida International League minor league teams. There is also the 1949 Havana Cubans album, but the set only picture the Havana FIL team. A number of other sets pictured a smattering of Havana Cuban players among the other players from the Cuban Leagues.

As an example of a more non-traditional approach that I take, look at Julio Moreno cards pictured below. His first card in my PC is his 1942 Avance y La Tropical premium, his first minor league cards are the 1946 La ambrosia and Reyes del Deporte cards, and his rookie is his 1953-54 Briggs Meats.

Chris I agree with you the the 1952-53 Colecciones Victoria set is one great set. But just about all the Cuban sets include first cards of lots of HOF members and other MLB players.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by Cubanball

The way I organize my PC of Cuban born players is as follows. For pre-1949 players I simply seek out the players first card or as close as I can come to their first card. I define a first card as the first card, postcard, premium or team issue that pictures the player only or in multiple player cards like the Topps Rookies cards (leaders and team cards are not included). For post-1949 players I seek out their first card, next their first minor league card and their first rookie card(s). I define Rookie card as their first card picturing the player in a Major League uniform. For players with multiple cards produced in their first year I go with the more traditional definition and include only their cards from the major sets. An example pictured below is Minnie Miñoso. His first card is his 1945-46 Caramelo Deportivo, his first Minor league card is his 1950 Hage's Dairy, and his rookie card(s) are his 1952 Bowman and 1952 Topps.

As for Minor League cards I wanted to point out that there are two Cuban produced sets that picture players in Minor league teams. The sets are the 1946 Propagandas Montiel La Ambrosia set and the 1946 Propagandas Montiel Reyes del Deporte set which picture players from the Florida International League minor league teams. There is also the 1949 Havana Cubans album, but the set only picture the Havana FIL team. A number of other sets pictured a smattering of Havana Cuban players among the other players from the Cuban Leagues.

As an example of a more non-traditional approach that I take, look at Julio Moreno cards pictured below. His first card in my PC is his 1942 Avance y La Tropical premium, his first minor league cards are the 1946 La ambrosia and Reyes del Deporte cards, and his rookie is his 1953-54 Briggs Meats.

Chris I agree with you the the 1952-53 Colecciones Victoria set is one great set. But just about all the Cuban sets include first cards of lots of HOF members and other MLB players.

This is helpful background on some of the key Cuban issues. I love the 1946 Montiels Stan Musial and Martin Dihigo cards. That Stan Musial card seems to check every box as his true MLB rookie card.

In many ways, the Cuban issues for 1940s and 50s HOFers might be like the Japanese issues for guys like Ichiro and Ohtani. If you're collecting players' first cards (which I find interesting), you're intellectually committed to looking at overseas and minor league issues.

[Luke]

I agree with you about the more scarce, earlier card being cooler. But I think the takeaway is more that they are a good thing for you to buy because they seem like a better deal than the mainstream RC than they are a great place to park your money.

Sometimes the cards that seem like a bargain to me end up appreciating in value, but usually not. For the most part I think you'd be better off investment wise by putting that Pujols minor league card money into the S&P 500 if it was purely about investing.

[KJA]

Originally Posted by todeen

Barry Larkin's most expensive 1986 RC is the team issued Kahn's. They sell for $50 - $100 in raw condition. Very very hard to find in Gem condition since it was a low budget team issue.



Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

What the first year they did the Kahn's sets? I have the 88-91 ones, wanted the 87 one but Larkin's rookie makes it too pricey for me. Personally the 91 set is my favorite with the World Series trophy on them.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by KJA

What the first year they did the Kahn's sets? I have the 88-91 ones, wanted the 87 one but Larkin's rookie makes it too pricey for me. Personally the 91 set is my favorite with the World Series trophy on them.

Early to Mid 50s? Frank Robinson has a Kahns RC from 1956, pre-dating his 1957 Topps RC. (pic from PSA website).

And I believe Kahns made Pittsburgh Pirates sets from the the 50s also, so there is likely a Clemente RC possible.

Edit: I think they stopped making them for a while. I think 1987 Kahns is the first year they restarted with the Reds. But maybe they continued with other teams while not making Reds sets.



Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

As more and more people open their minds to things other than topps/bowman (very common cards) they realize their own collections are very streamlined and in some ways not unique. Of course there is no problem with that. But for people who eventually get those thoughts, the general next step is going for memorabilia that is unique, scarce, rare.
Pre war you will see has adopted this thought process decades ago, getting pre rookie or early hof material of pre war greats is almost impossible and if possible you seriously have to be a millionaire to consider collecting.

As it is now, in particular 50s and 60s pre rookie issues are in my opinion extremely undervalued. And many multiple 100 times rarer than their rookie standard counterparts.

I'll give one quick example of one of the craziest. Stan Musials M114, an issue of one of the top 5 best hitters of all time that is 5 years before his "rookie card" goes for under $200 and often times under $100. That is comical. You can get original photos that are many times one of a kind for a fraction of a topps rookie card that quite literally is a dime a dozen.

Wow that is crazy. I know nothing about that era minor league stuff. I have collected a lot of 80s, early 90s and some Tobacco card minor league stuff and it is mostly more than their rookies.

[BioCRN]

For modern minor league cards, a lot depends on the pool of player collectors once you get into junk wax era and beyond.

Rarity doesn't always matter, but rarity starts to actually matter at a certain point of number of collectors and the price starts to show up.

It seems elementary and "no duh" and all that, but there's a huge amount of people that will buy a RC that don't care about a player's minor league "RC" in comparison.

Personally experienced example, Mark Grace's 1986 Peoria card in NM/M+ condition could easily be picked up for $5-ish after the junk wax era died. It stayed that way for a very long time. During the recent COVID era hobby resurgence the card not only went up in price, it went up in popularity enough that you're looking at $35-40 for a raw copy in that kind of shape and a premium for graded examples. Almost everything spiked in price during this era, but not everything got a 7-8x value jump. The number of people wanting one finally caught up to the availability.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

For modern minor league cards, a lot depends on the pool of player collectors once you get into junk wax era and beyond.

Rarity doesn't always matter, but rarity starts to actually matter at a certain point of number of collectors and the price starts to show up.

It seems elementary and "no duh" and all that, but there's a huge amount of people that will buy a RC that don't care about a player's minor league "RC" in comparison.

Personally experienced example, Mark Grace's 1986 Peoria card in NM/M+ condition could easily be picked up for $5-ish after the junk wax era died. It stayed that way for a long very long time. During the recent COVID era hobby resurgence the card not only went up in price, it went up in popularity enough that you're looking at $35-40 for a raw copy in that kind of shape and a premium for graded examples. Almost everything spiked in price during this era, but not everything got a 7-8x value jump. The number of people wanting one finally caught up to the availability.

And this is exactly the dynamic that I've seen a bit of as well.

When I returned to the hobby, I was quickly turned off by modern players having what seemed like hundreds of cards with the "RC" logo. So I found it fun to do a little bit of work (and it really isn't all that much work to use Google) to find those players' first minor league cards.

At the time of printing, these guys were not even prospects, and the manufacturers kind of have a junior varsity feel about them -- so definitionally, very low print runs.

A Mookie Betts 2014 Topps Heritage in PSA 10 (population of about 1,000) sells for $300. In contrast, I'd be surprised if there are more than 500 Mookie Betts Lowell Spinners cards printed in total. The price has already moved up on those cards, but it's more like the Mark Grace that you describe.

I get Peter's point that the market is what it is, and there is no why. But as a collector (if not an investor), I find the Lowell card irresistibly more interesting.