[novakjr]

I've always thought that the standard catalog(and most price guides) did a poor job of pricing. Obviously, I don't think that their intentions was to necessarily have accurate pricing though. For what it is, I think they did a good job. But it's fairly obvious that for the most part the cards in any set were pretty much just priced in "suggested tiers"... common, semi, low end HOF, typical HOF, and then the high end guys (like Ruth, Gehrig).. Very little attention payed to specifics(especially in pre-war) for things like Rookie consideration... In many pre-war listings, there are rookies of HOFers(or cards that could be considered a rookie depending on an individuals criteria) that are just lumped in with the typical comparable HOFer price-wise. When in reality, they seem to command a little more of a premium in the open market, due to their being a growing number of rookie collectors. I'm sorry, but a (reasonably considerable) "rookie" of a HOF player is worth more than a comparable HOFer who is in his 16th season...

Yes, I know the rookie thing in terms of pre-war is somewhat subjective, and almost a taboo topic with some collectors, but to completely ignore it as a factor in this suggested pricing is kinda silly.. If a premium can be given to Yankees/Dodgers in the pricing, then one should also be given to actual (or potentially acceptable) rookies...

If this same pricing were applied to modern cards, then I guess a 1982 Topps Cal Ripken rookie would be worth the same a 1982 Topps Nolan Ryan.. Or the 1978 Topps Paul Molitor rookie would be worth the same as a 1978 Topps Rod Carew... Ridiculous, right?

For the record, I really only use these as checklists too...