Which years are Jeter's rookie card?

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So I am having a friendly discussion with a well-known seller. His position is that the market generally considers all Jeter cards from 1992 to 1996 to be rookies.

Absolute nonsense.

"The market" is not "little johnny's grandma" who is sucker enough to think that a 96' with "rookie" printed on it is his rc for his Christmas stocking. The market should be knowledgeable collectors, not someone you are snowing for cash.

Your definition is right on, but in difference I like the XRC designation in most cases. I think if the player shows in his major league uni, it's a RC, games played or not. XRC would be shown in a minor league uni or other (high school, college, olympic, etc).

The McGwire was a bit of an aberration as to how that became the rookie. I don't have a clue how it broke the rules, but I think it was more so because there was not much of a previous example mainstream.

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Absolute nonsense.

"The market" is not "little johnny's grandma" who is sucker enough to think that a 96' with "rookie" printed on it is his rc for his Christmas stocking. The market should be knowledgeable collectors, not someone you are snowing for cash.

Your definition is right on, but in difference I like the XRC designation in most cases. I think if the player shows in his major league uni, it's a RC, games played or not. XRC would be shown in a minor league uni or other (high school, college, olympic, etc).

The McGwire was a bit of an aberration as to how that became the rookie. I don't have a clue how it broke the rules, but I think it was more so because there was not much of a previous example mainstream.

The XRC/olympic jersey issue also happened with Nomar Garciaparra (I am sure others but he came to mind). He is in the 1992 Topps Traded set in his USA Jersey, but that is considered his RC even though he didn't play in Majors until 1996. At best the 1992 card should have been an XRC based off the rules, but that didn't stop the market from deciding otherwise.

The problem that was caused by the 2006 rules is that people that weren't in the hobby prior to then, or those that didn't stay in modern are unable to reconcile the two hobby rules. Prior to 2006 it was purely based on the majority of the hobby, even if this was primarily dictated by Beckett and SCD, and Tuff Stuff. After 2006 the rules were dictated by MLB.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Absolute nonsense.

"The market" is not "little johnny's grandma" who is sucker enough to think that a 96' with "rookie" printed on it is his rc for his Christmas stocking. The market should be knowledgeable collectors, not someone you are snowing for cash.

Your definition is right on, but in difference I like the XRC designation in most cases. I think if the player shows in his major league uni, it's a RC, games played or not. XRC would be shown in a minor league uni or other (high school, college, olympic, etc).

The McGwire was a bit of an aberration as to how that became the rookie. I don't have a clue how it broke the rules, but I think it was more so because there was not much of a previous example mainstream.

I thought for Beckett XRC was used for products not sold in packs, nothing to do with uniform.

[Bill77]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I thought for Beckett XRC was used for products not sold in packs, nothing to do with uniform.

That was always the way I saw it. XRC's are usually from sets like Topps traded or Fleer and Donruss equivalent sets. Though later they started list XRC's in sets that could be bought in packs like 2002 Upper Deck Prospect Premieres (Although I don't remember if you could buy single packs or if it was only available in blaster boxes at the time).

The only reason I know of for the 85 McGwire rookie being listed as a rookie is because it was in the basic Topps set and not the Topps Traded set.

Just looked at one of my old Becketts and saw that Topps Traded XRC's are listed as rookies starting in 1989 as well as the Donruss and Fleer sets as well.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The Beckett XRC thing is why a third year Jordan card is widely considered his rookie.

[JustinD]

With all the minor league (and even cards of 14U) that are main stream releases, XRC is going to lean in much different direction. The manufacturers are selling to prospectors and know the market is there. Any card mainstream or not that does not show the player in a major league uni should be an XRC in my mind.

It's not always followed to the letter, but it is how I differentiate it in collecting.

If a mainstream release has the MVP of the little league world series and 8 years later he joins the bigs, that should not in any way be a RC. Mainstream set or not.

[BeanTown]

I like to have the players first card from a distributed set. So, call it a pre rookie card or rookie card, Ill take the 1992 Little Sun card all day long. I tend to gravitate to more obscure and small print runs so the Little Sun card gets my vote.

[KingFisk]

A couple of years ago when I was going after rookies of every Cy Young winner and every MVP from 1950 onward, I found the modern rookie jungle really tough to navigate. I sort of threw my hands up ultimately and tended towards first cards from base sets but also got a few prospect cards in the mix too. I wasn't sweating having a 2007 Bowman Chrome Draft vs a 2013 Topps Update Corey Kluber.

[glynparson]

No other choice really.

[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.