Advice on Modern Rookie Cards 2000-2019

[bcbgcbrcb]

Prior to getting into pre-war card collecting during the early 2000's, I was a long time baseball rookie card collector from 1981-2000. Even to this day, I can flip through just about every card set from that time period and identify every significant rookie card, likely not missing more than a single card per set. Since 2000 though, I completely lost touch with who the rookies were each season and today I decided to make a trip to my local card shop in Orlando and see if I could begin slowly trying to fill in the rookie card gaps over the past 20 years. This change of focus was prompted primarily by my recent "retirement" due to health issues and very little money coming in so it's pretty much impossible for me to continue the pre-war baseball collecting.

As I was at the shop today going through modern boxes of loose cards, I had the latest Beckett in hand and was just overwhelmed at how many different sets/subsets that each card manufacturer is putting out each year these days. I was totally confused trying to look up the cards that I had in my hands to see exactly what sets they came from, eventually just getting frustrated and giving up.

After giving the situation some more thought, I decided that the best way for me to tackle this task would be to pick one major brand/set that was around for pretty much the entire past 20 years and just collect the rookie cards that I am interested in from that brand only. So my question for board members here who have kept up with the modern rookie card craze is "what set would you recommend that I can focus on for the past 20 years and go back and acquire most of the big name rookies. To keep it simple, I really don't want to switch brands/sets each year but would rather stick with one choice for the entire 20 year period.

Any input would be most appreciated and I will wait for any replies to discuss further.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Topps Update would be my choice, the Trout is the most iconic card of the past decade or longer and they are extremely popular every year. Not quite sure what year they started.

[Mike D.]

Many "true" rookie cards are in Bowman sets, I believe...as they tend to appear from 1 to several years before other RC's.

BTW, I feel you on the post 2000 RC's. I share your affinity for RC's, and Pretty sure I could rattle off every major RC from 1970-1995 or so without much effort.

After that, though, it gets....muddy. Maybe we can compile a "key rookie card from each year" chart somewhere with some crowd-sourcing?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Many "true" rookie cards are in Bowman sets, I believe...as they tend to appear from 1 to several years before other RC's.

BTW, I feel you on the post 2000 RC's. I share your affinity for RC's, and Pretty sure I could rattle off every major RC from 1970-1995 or so without much effort.

After that, though, it gets....muddy. Maybe we can compile a "key rookie card from each year" chart somewhere with some crowd-sourcing?

The Bowman cards are not considered rookie cards by the current market, because they don't have the official RC logo. That logo now can only be put on a card after a player has appeared in a ML game, I believe. Or maybe it has something to do with being on the opening day roster. I forget. But in any event the same Bowman cards in the 90s would have been considered rookie cards. It's confusing.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The Bowman cards are not considered rookie cards by the current market, because they don't have the official RC logo. That logo now can only be put on a card after a player has appeared in a ML game, I believe. Or maybe it has something to do with being on the opening day roster. I forget. But in any event the same Bowman cards in the 90s would have been considered rookie cards. It's confusing.

Interesting. I haven't followed 2000's rookies closely in, oh, about 19 years.

What do they call the Bowman's that appear before other RCs? The example I often see is Joey Votto, who's Bowman card pre-dates his next RC by something absurd like 5-6 years.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Interesting. I haven't followed 2000's rookies closely in, oh, about 19 years.

What do they call the Bowman's that appear before other RCs? The example I often see is Joey Votto, who's Bowman card pre-dates his next RC by something absurd like 5-6 years.

Prospect cards I think.

[bcbgcbrcb]

I appreciate all of the input so far, guys. I have to agree that probably the most confusing thing these days is that Beckett designates each player’s rookie card year, I think, based on their appearing in a major league uniform/roster. Thus, many players have “prospect” or “team USA” cards one or more years prior to the official rookie year designation. The same holds true for inserts, refractors, subsets, autos, etc. which do not get the rookie card designation either unless in a major league uniform by that point. So I guess the biggest question is, which is more desirable to own, the “rookie card” or the “earliest card” of the player. They used to be the same but now the waters seem to be very muddy.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

I appreciate all of the input so far, guys. I have to agree that probably the most confusing thing these days is that Beckett designates each player’s rookie card year, I think, based on their appearing in a major league uniform/roster. Thus, many players have “prospect” or “team USA” cards one or more years prior to the official rookie year designation. The same holds true for inserts, refractors, subsets, autos, etc. which do not get the rookie card designation either unless in a major league uniform by that point. So I guess the biggest question is, which is more desirable to own, the “rookie card” or the “earliest card” of the player. They used to be the same but now the waters seem to be very muddy.

I would stick to official rookie cards. I consider the prospect cards to be the equivalent of minor league cards even though they are from a major manufacturer. To me they're the same as, say, the 1992 Upper Deck Minor League Jeter for example.

The real confusion is the absolutely endless variety of cards even within the same sets. There are 10 or more, I think, variations of the Acuna Topps Update alone.

[RCMcKenzie]

Say you want to know what the rookie for Jose Altuve is...type "Jose Altuve RC" into the search box on ebay and sort by highest price first in sold/completed items. 2011 Bowman Sterling is the most expensive, followed by 2010 Bowman Chrome and 2011 Topps Update.


For Alex Bregman it's 2016 Bowman Chrome and down the line something called Topps Heritage.

I only follow the Houston players and have not bought a new card since 1998 Bowman Chrome or something like that. The cards are expensive unless you are talking about an unknown like Framber Valdez or someone like that. Happy collecting. Rob

[bcbgcbrcb]

Are the Bowman and Bowman Chrome usually the exact same set as far as player selection, just higher quality cards for the Chrome, thus, more expensive? Same thing for the Topps and Topps Chrome?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Are the Bowman and Bowman Chrome usually the exact same set as far as player selection, just higher quality cards for the Chrome, thus, more expensive? Same thing for the Topps and Topps Chrome?

Topps Chrome don't carry a premium as far as I know. I think they are some of the cheaper cards, for example of Acuna. Not like the old Bowman and Bowman Chrome of the 90s. I also think for Topps they are now different sets, but not totally sure. But I have seen a Topps Chrome Acuna that doesn't have a parallel in Topps.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Say you want to know what the rookie for Jose Altuve is...type "Jose Altuve RC" into the search box on ebay and sort by highest price first in sold/completed items. 2011 Bowman Sterling is the most expensive, followed by 2010 Bowman Chrome and 2011 Topps Update.


For Alex Bregman it's 2016 Bowman Chrome and down the line something called Topps Heritage.

I only follow the Houston players and have not bought a new card since 1998 Bowman Chrome or something like that. The cards are expensive unless you are talking about an unknown like Framber Valdez or someone like that. Happy collecting. Rob

Despite the Beckett holder, I think the Sterling Altuve is a nice card.

[RCMcKenzie]

I agree. I don't care much for the 'chest-bump' Topps Update Altuve one, but you can find his base card for less than $50. I saw a Trout base card in psa 7 sell for $350 recently.

The experts on this stuff are on the Blowout Board. They have threads like "Carlos Correa pick-ups" where they show all their auto-patch limited # cards. It's all very confusing to me. It's really a different hobby than what I'm doing on here.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Agreed, Rob. It’s become more like a lottery chance than chipping away at a complete set, player collection, etc.

When all is said and done, I’m not sure that I am going to want to get into this modern stuff but asking questions is the best way for me to find out.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Agreed, Rob. It’s become more like a lottery chance than chipping away at a complete set, player collection, etc.

When all is said and done, I’m not sure that I am going to want to get into this modern stuff but asking questions is the best way for me to find out.

For the most part I just buy base cards of rookies I want, or in a couple of cases the most basic variation. if I want to put a little more at risk You can easily navigate it. Another nice option for a vintage look just buy the Heritage base cards.

[RCMcKenzie]

Modern is not where I would like to spend all of my hobby money, but Peter may have talked me into buying an Altuve. Jose is on pace, or ahead of Rose's all-time hit pace. Always looking for value.

Speaking of bargains...how's this one for $10 shipped. I collect all things Astros and couldn't let this one go...

[MrPosadas]

I collect modern rookies as well as older stuff but don’t get caught up in the multitude of card variations. I usually hunt down their first standard card and leave the other cards alone. PSA has a future HOF rookie set list that includes Bowman Best, Topps Chrome, and Upper Deck SP rookie cards but I don’t use it to guide my collection because I am happy collecting base rookie cards. It was the proliferation and manufactured scarcity that pushed me away from collecting in the 90s and when I got back into it I chose to focus only on base cards to keep my sanity.

[ALR-bishop]

For Topps, does base include the Update/Traded set ? That discussion has popped up in threads on set runs

The Cardinals gave up Jerry Ruess to get Scipio. It might have worked out well for the Cards but for Johnny Bench

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

For Topps, does base include the Update/Traded set ? That discussion has popped up in threads on set runs

The Cardinals gave up Jerry Ruess to get Scipio. It might have worked out well for the Cards but for Johnny Bench

I was using base to differentiate from all the parallels and variations, not from a set completion pov.

[ALR-bishop]

My Q was really to Ryan's post. Since 1994 I am just a base collector myself, but for Topps I include any Traded/ Update set. There are a few years when there was no Traded/Update sets. Based on prior threads many set collectors would not include such sets as base, but rather a new separate set. Like the definition of a variation there is no single right answer I guess.

[chalupacollects]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The Bowman cards are not considered rookie cards by the current market, because they don't have the official RC logo. That logo now can only be put on a card after a player has appeared in a ML game, I believe. Or maybe it has something to do with being on the opening day roster. I forget. But in any event the same Bowman cards in the 90s would have been considered rookie cards. It's confusing.

Nowadays Topps usually uses Bowman Sterling to introduce rookies with the RC logo after they have appeared in Major League games... Kind of a pricy box this year with Alonso's first RC card and several others....

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

My Q was really to Ryan's post. Since 1994 I am just a base collector myself, but for Topps I include any Traded/ Update set. There are a few years when there was no Traded/Update sets. Based on prior threads many set collectors would not include such sets as base, but rather a new separate set. Like the definition of a variation there is no single right answer I guess.

Since the Update sets may contain rookies not found in the regular set I would think you have to have them.

[todeen]

I would say that you need to be cautious of price reduction if you are looking for investment purposes. I can remember Pujols and Ichiro rookies fetching outrageous prices. Then, when they got older and slowed down their production, their rookie card prices fell as well. Both are sure bet hall of famers. If I was trying to catch up my rookie card stash (I don't collect rookie cards), I would start in 2000 and work to present....rather than starting present and working backwards. I think you will find your retirement income will carry you farther.

As for the RC logo versus "Prospect Cards," I can remember when that change occurred. I believe it was MLB instituted to help rein in the card industry and the crazy variations and sets that were being created. People wanted a clarification of what was and what wasn't a RC, and this was the simplest way to make that designation. Joey Votto case in point.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Look at the countless varieties of Acuna rookies and tell me MLB did a good job of controlling this lol. Type 2018 Acuna into the PSA Pop Report baseball card search and it comes up with .... wait for it.... 914 results LOL.

[Steve D]

I also collect some of the current rookies, and try to focus on Topps Chrome.

If there is no Topps Chrome RC for a particular player, I'll go with the regular Topps.

From what I've seen, I believe Topps keeps the variations in Chrome to a minimum; i.e., for Kris Bryant in 2015, they issued pose variations of his card, but with the Chrome, there was only one pose.

I do though, stay away from the other Topps issues like Heritage.

It can be tough though, to keep it to Topps. With Jose Altuve for instance, I really don't like his 2011 Topps Update card...It just looks strange to me with the headless teammate hugging him; so I went with the 2011 Bowman Chrome Draft card.

Steve

[maniac_73]

I remember why I don't collect much modern now, my head is spinning lol! Also not one for manufactured scarcity but everyone likes what they like.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Steve D

I also collect some of the current rookies, and try to focus on Topps Chrome.

If there is no Topps Chrome RC for a particular player, I'll go with the regular Topps.

From what I've seen, I believe Topps keeps the variations in Chrome to a minimum; i.e., for Kris Bryant in 2015, they issued pose variations of his card, but with the Chrome, there was only one pose.

I do though, stay away from the other Topps issues like Heritage.

It can be tough though, to keep it to Topps. With Jose Altuve for instance, I really don't like his 2011 Topps Update card...It just looks strange to me with the headless teammate hugging him; so I went with the 2011 Bowman Chrome Draft card.

Steve

The Topps Update Altuve may be the worst rookie card ever produced. Which is unfortunate because even in the scarcer varieties (Cognac and Diamond) it's pretty affordable.

[swarmee]

Vintage breaks just pulled the 2011 Bowman Draft Red Paper 1/1 Altuve RC. Will be interesting to see what that goes for.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q8RoE5jdK4
At 5:40

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

For Topps, does base include the Update/Traded set ? That discussion has popped up in threads on set runs

The Cardinals gave up Jerry Ruess to get Scipio. It might have worked out well for the Cards but for Johnny Bench

I don't remember the Astros 1970 rookies, but I do remember "Rolls Reuss", I don't recall that being his nickname, but that's what my dad calls him.

The guy on the Altuve rookie is Dave Clark. He was the 3rd base coach at the time. I have a Clark game worn jersey that I wear to games sometimes. People think it's "Will Clark"....(not my cards, but I will be getting some modern cards soon b/c they are all over my eBay watchlist now...

[MVSNYC]

Good thread.

I'm a vintage collector (T206), but earlier this year I wanted to add some modern rookie cards, so I read up and asked some questions here on N54, and slowly picked up some nice PSA 10 cards...Funny, I never knew that about the "RC" on the cards, makes sense, and is helpful (although there's still too many choices). I also prefer Topps Update.


PS- Re: Aaron Judge, what's the concensious for his "best" (non-sig) RC to get?

[bcbgcbrcb]

Well, I gave it a shot today and picked up my first couple of modern rookie cards. After looking over a lot of stats from the past few seasons, I opted to do e-bay searches for Mookie Betts and Francisco Lindor rookie cards. I ended up picking up what I believe to be the earliest issues for each, Betts was the 2013 Panini Prizm Draft Pick base card in a PSA 10 holder for $13.00 plus $3.50 shipping. For Lindor, I picked up a raw 2009-2010 Upper Deck Team USA Triple Jersey Relic card for $5.95 w/free shipping.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Not sure what your criteria were but you did not get the earliest Betts card.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/2012-GRANDS...gAAOSwos1c5XbD

[bcbgcbrcb]

Thanks, Peter. I opted to stay away from the minor leagues produced sets, I believe that the one you mentioned was the only 2012 issue, am I correct?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Thanks, Peter. I opted to stay away from the minor leagues produced sets, I believe that the one you mentioned was the only 2012 issue, am I correct?

I believe so.

[bcbgcbrcb]

It’s been just about 2 months now since my original post so I thought it would be a good time to provide an update on how my modern rookie cards collection is going. I am certainly a good deal more knowledgeable than I was previously, thanks to all that provided excellent content here for me. I have been able to take advantage of three sources, local shops (only 2 near me in Central FL), local shows (very few, average one/month) and eBay.

For a while, I was picking up the players that I wanted as long as they were either RC logo year or prior. Now I am realizing that their cards notated “First Year” almost always the Bowman/Bowman Chrome issues are the ones highest in demand amongst base cards, running hand in hand with the Topps Update RC’s for those players.

The ultimate jackpots seem to be the first year Bowman Chrome Refractor Autos. Some of the best ones seem to go for $1,000+

[packs]

I like to dabble in modern too. I bought one of these just in case:

[Peter_Spaeth]

The flip sums it up pretty well -- on paper, he's a tremendous prospect.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The flip sums it up pretty well -- on paper, he's a tremendous prospect.

Haha no doubt but I'm hoping one paper leads to another.

[Exhibitman]

Guess it depends on your collecting goal. I just pick the card I find most appealing and try to stay away from the lotto-type cards. Probably my mistake as some of the cards I've not bothered with have skyrocketed.

In the late 70s-80s when I was buying tons of packs to bust I'd just stick the cards in a fail drawer by year and when a RC got hot, like the 1980 Henderson, I'd go into the drawer and see what I had.

[VoodooChild]

From what I've learned about dabbling in modern collecting over the past 10 years is that the serially numbered, autographed, bowman chrome (the ones that have the "1st Bowman Chrome" icon on them) are the most sought after cards generally. I do consider those pre-rookie but they are "on-card" autographs which is also a plus with most collectors. I pretty much learned to stay away from those. There are very few unknown prospects anymore. The top tier 1st Bowman Chrome, serially #'d, autograph prospect cards can run from a few hundred to a couple thousand at first release. Even the second and third tier guys will run in the hundreds.

I now focus on Topps Series 1, Series 2, or Update gold parallel cards with the "RC" logo on them. The gold parallels are serially #'d to the year of the release. So this year they are #'d to /2019 but they don't have any weird refractor/x-fractor look to them. I normally pick most guys up for under $10 but some of the hot rookies could run about $50. Here's the most recent one I picked up from the 2019 Update series:

[bcbgcbrcb]

Thank you for the great insight, Jason. Everything there sounds right on from the very short time that I have been collecting this stuff.

So you are really gambling a few hundred per on those jackpot type cards in hopes of winding up with the next Trout $10K+ card. (Of course, some will become all-stars, possible HOF’ers or solid players, in the end, I think you might do a little better than break even for these levels of players. Probably hundreds of busts for every Trout, don’t think that’s a real smart way to collect/invest, but that’s just my opinion.

[VoodooChild]

Hey Phil,

Oh no, in my post I said I learned to stay away from those 1st Bowman autographed pre-rookie cards. I never bought the low serial #'d crazy priced ones anyways. I've done ok with some "under the radar" prospects like Lindor at the time was reasonably priced for a #'d /500 one. But for every one like him, I busted on like 10 others. Now, I do buy all the Pirates still but they never have a prospect that gets those crazy prices...ha! But I do have a Gerrit Cole auto #'d/150 that I paid a couple hundred for that worked out.

So yeah that's why I now wait to buy their Topps Gold parallel RC cards because that way I'm not taking a risk on a 17 year old in low-A that probably won't ever even make the majors. And if I do want autographed cards, I like the Gypsy Queen and Topps Museum issues for those because I like the look of them.

[ToddW.]

My .02 on modern is either 1st Bowman Chrome Auto or Flagship (Base Topps). Flagship includes Series 1, Series 2 & Update and the most desirable will vary by player. Most recently update has been it (2018 and other years). This year (2019) it seems to be Series 2, as most of the first rookies are in Series 2 (Tatis/Alonso etc). Update only has Vlad (although he has a not-so SSP print in Series 2 as well), and second tier such as Huira and others. Its possible next year it could be Series 1 as that is where Yordan Alvarez will have his first "RC logo" card). Sometimes Topps Chrome may be the target, but if you focus on flagship you usually can't go wrong.

[packs]

Topps Heritage beats out most other Topps products if you're looking for "investment".

[Exhibitman]

I went Trout fishing last week and found that the 2011 product that has the RC logo and seems to carry the best bang for the buck is the Bowman family in a PSA 8. Picked up a nice one for under $100. The Topps update is through the roof. Probably has room to go given that his WAR is already 87th in history and he's only got 9 seasons. I can see him considered in the same echelon as Mays, Aaron, Mantle, etc.

I've been busting the Walgreens series 2 hanger boxes for s***s and giggles to chase the yellow variations. Haven't hit the $130-ish mini-Vlad yet but I'm having fun.

As far as investing goes, if you look over the last 20 years there are base issue cards every year that have done well but only a few that have really taken off and kept going. I am far out of the money on busting packs and boxes. It seems more of a gamble on a lotto-caliber insert than anything else.

[BigMeek]

Originally Posted by packs

I like to dabble in modern too. I bought one of these just in case:

Yikes

[td_cardz]

I would try to start a collection of 1st Bowman Card (base, Chrome, parallels, autographs if possible) as a way to cover the bases/hedge the bet.

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Interesting. I haven't followed 2000's rookies closely in, oh, about 19 years.

What do they call the Bowman's that appear before other RCs? The example I often see is Joey Votto, who's Bowman card pre-dates his next RC by something absurd like 5-6 years.

[Zach Wheat]

Phil,

I focus on Bowman Chrome.

Bowman Chrome has been around since '97. I tend to collect Bowman Chrome specifically because of the rookie cards. Bowman notes a players first Bowman cards by putting a 1st on the card (Draft & Prospect). Bowman Chrome tends to slant more towards international players while Bowman 1st Draft & Propsects tends to slant more towards US Players.

[BruceinGa]

I sold all of my T205's and T206's and haven't been here much. I'm also liquidating many cards from the 50's through 80's.
Now I've decided to buy some modern Braves rookies. I've struggled making some sense of X-fractors, Refractors, Black, Septia, Prism and so forth.
From what I've seen Topps Chrome is one step up from the the base card, I don't look at Bowman or other brands, just Topps Chrome. I did buy 2 or 3 basic Topps but probably won't any more.
I would love to see someone post a complete list of variations along with production numbers.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by BruceinGa

I would love to see someone post a complete list of variations along with production numbers.

Changes every year. Best bet is to go to baseballcardpedia or one of the other checklisting sites to see what's rarest. That's one reason that the standard parallel colors (red /5, orange /25, gold /50, green /99 for Bowman Chrome) seem to remain the best ones over time.