Minor league cards

[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