Which years are Jeter's rookie card?

[steve B]

So 1992 little sun - Not a rookie because it's only a HS prospects set.
1993 - ROOKIE!! even though he played no games and wouldn't for a couple years.
1994 signature rookies - Not a rookie since it's just a prospects set.
1995 Not a rookie because duh, the rookie is the 1993......


That's a bit more involved than some modern players, but not by much. McGwire had the 85 which was then wasn't the rookie, or the 87s.

The whole thing is pretty much pointless for modern cards anyway, since they are saved in quantity instead of being routinely thrown out after 3-4 years.

[Peter_Spaeth]

To me, at least pre the official designation, the first appearance in a major league base set from one of the major licensed manufacturers is the rookie card. Whether or not he was playing at the time. And there can NEVER be rookie cards from more than one year.

Beckett I think basically had it right although the XRC was really stupid IMO.

[steve B]

That works in most cases, but I've always seen it as being very artificial. I tend to read it as
"Whatever card was issued closest to the players first year and in enough quantity that dealers can easily capitalize on it. "

So the XRCs are that because not every dealer bothered to buy the update sets.
It's even sillier that it holds for the year they sold the update cards in packs as well as the sets. Not like recently, whichever year the did it in the 80's I've just forgotten the year.

[drcy]

Two points. The market doesn't think that, and the market can be wrong.

I'm not even sure what is meant by 'market.' Does he mean values? If so, value isn't a definer-- see '52 Topps versus '51 Bowman Mantle.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by drcy

Two points. The market doesn't think that, and the market can be wrong.

I'm not even sure what is meant by 'market.' Does he mean values? If so, value isn't a definer-- see '52 Topps versus '51 Bowman Mantle.

No, it isn't a question of values, it's a question of what's the rookie card.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Neal

The 93 SP is his most recognized card, so I view the SP and Stadium Club as rookies

Jeter has a few others I like from 95 and 96 - the Leaf Signature is fantastic.

Originally Posted by drcy

Two points. The market doesn't think that, and the market can be wrong.

I'm not even sure what is meant by 'market.' Does he mean values? If so, value isn't a definer-- see '52 Topps versus '51 Bowman Mantle.

That's the trouble with "Modern" way too many RC's exist.
This is a list of his recognized RC's, but as you will see, they are categorized from least to most desirable which makes picking his "True, singular RC" practically impossible.
https://www.cardboardconnection.com/...r-rookie-cards

I have been looking at John Tavares RC's, and although his Young Guns RC is pretty much thought to be his "true" RC, many others from the same 09-10 season also exist.

I am not sure if Jeter has that one card like Tavares does, however?

[WillBBC]

Originally Posted by irv

That's the trouble with "Modern" way too many RC's exist.
This is a list of his recognized RC's, but as you will see, they are categorized from least to most desirable which makes picking his "True, singular RC" practically impossible.
https://www.cardboardconnection.com/...r-rookie-cards

I have been looking at John Tavares RC's, and although his Young Guns RC is pretty much thought to be his "true" RC, many others from the same 09-10 season also exist.

I am not sure if Jeter has that one card like Tavares does, however?

Modern hockey kind of has tiers for rookie cards. This is totally subjective but like you said, the Young Guns RC is basically the 'best' normal, old-school rookie card to own.

SP Authentic Future Watch Autographs are the high end rookies that command big, big premiums despite being much more readily available than some of the rarer counterparts like Ice autographs, Ultimate, Black, Trilogy, etc.

Then there's the Cup. At that point--I just don't know what to say. The prices those cards get blow my friggin' mind every single year. Some of them are down right ugly and still pull 10K easy. Set and brand history/pedigree can go a long, long way!

As for Jeter--the SP is most definitely his most iconic rookie card if you go by the 'old' Beckett RC definition. If you're looking for a card from his first full season, or even '95-there are just sooo many great options.

[homerunderby]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To me, at least pre the official designation, the first appearance in a major league base set from one of the major licensed manufacturers is the rookie card. Whether or not he was playing at the time. And there can NEVER be rookie cards from more than one year.

Beckett I think basically had it right although the XRC was really stupid IMO.

This. At least for me. The 1992 Classics are nice but they are "pre-rookies" to me. Does anyone else still use that term? The 1993 Topps, Bowman, Upper Deck, and SP are the rookies to me. 1996 aren't rookies and parallels to 1993 aren't rookies either, though they are very collectable.

XRC as I remember was a term before "Traded" sets were considered real rookies. Traded sets have been around almost 40 years, I think they are here to stay

[T205 GB]

What about the 93 Topps and Topps gold draft pick card? Just happen to find a tote full of packs.

Any guesses as to how many Jeters I will find?