OT: Who Determined That Mantle's Rookie Card was the 52 Topps

[steve B]

Yes, "rookie card" is a hobby invention. But at the time, not an unreasonable one.

And it was around at least a few years before 1980.

The reasons they were worth more were
The general human obsession with things that are "first"
Before the mid-late 70's maybe a touch earlier, most cards were bought by kids. And most kids only collected for 3-4 years. At the time, many players didn't become stars right away. So the chances of having a players first card were fairly slim, and the chances of that card surviving the new hobby/mom cleaning/interest in cars/girls/ move to college .....were poor.
Using the 54 Aaron as an example, if you got one, which card went in the spokes? The established star? Favorite player? Local hero? Or that kid in Milwaukee who hit 13 homers? And if 54 was the last year you were into cards, it likely got tossed with the rest of the collection a few years later.

So yes, there's a reason rookie cards especially in better condition are worth more.

Calling the 52 Mantle a "rookie card" is generally ignorant. I have a hard time taking someone seriously if they call it that. Especially dealers.
The 52 Mantle is the most overhyped double printed card of a great but somewhat hyped player in a regional market that thrives on hype. (Any questions how I rate the card? )

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by steve B

Yes, "rookie card" is a hobby invention. But at the time, not an unreasonable one.

And it was around at least a few years before 1980.

The reasons they were worth more were
The general human obsession with things that are "first"
Before the mid-late 70's maybe a touch earlier, most cards were bought by kids. And most kids only collected for 3-4 years. At the time, many players didn't become stars right away. So the chances of having a players first card were fairly slim, and the chances of that card surviving the new hobby/mom cleaning/interest in cars/girls/ move to college .....were poor.
Using the 54 Aaron as an example, if you got one, which card went in the spokes? The established star? Favorite player? Local hero? Or that kid in Milwaukee who hit 13 homers? And if 54 was the last year you were into cards, it likely got tossed with the rest of the collection a few years later.

So yes, there's a reason rookie cards especially in better condition are worth more.

Calling the 52 Mantle a "rookie card" is generally ignorant. I have a hard time taking someone seriously if they call it that. Especially dealers.
The 52 Mantle is the most overhyped double printed card of a great but somewhat hyped player in a regional market that thrives on hype. (Any questions how I rate the card? )

Steve-You make a good point, but ten or twenty years later when that kid is deciding what to throw away and what to save, which cards do you think will be saved? Also, Carter, Burdick, etc—did they place any significance on rookie cards? I think not. I don’t recall any real hype about rookie cards till the late-1980s/early 1990s. However, your dates may reflect the birth of the term.

[TanksAndSpartans]

Burdick was a set collector though - I don't think he was much of a baseball fan. I think rookie card sets like the HOF rookie set tend to be popular among those who are fans first and collectors second as the idea of having one card each of a lot of all-time great players may be more appealing than collecting company issued sets.

[trdcrdkid]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Steve-You make a good point, but ten or twenty years later when that kid is deciding what to throw away and what to save, which cards do you think will be saved? Also, Carter, Burdick, etc—did they place any significance on rookie cards? I think not. I don’t recall any real hype about rookie cards till the late-1980s/early 1990s. However, your dates may reflect the birth of the term.

Neither Steve nor Jay is 100% correct, but Jay is closer. I don't have time for a full post on this subject (which I've been meaning to write one of these days), but here are the essentials.

As several people have noted, the modern concept of a "rookie card" did not exist in the early hobby. As I documented in a previous post (here: http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=233772), it was not until the mid-1960s that dealers even began consistently charging a premium for cards of star players, let alone "rookie cards". When the term "rookie card" was used in the hobby in the 1960s and 1970s, it referred to those multi-player "Rookie Stars" cards that Topps put out every year during that time. During this period, "sophisticated" collectors took pride in not caring who was pictured on a card, only about how rare it was and whether they needed it for their set.

(By the way, Steve is correct to say that before 1980 most baseball cards were bought by kids -- and that remained true for quite a while after 1980 -- but we're talking about the organized hobby that had existed since the 1930s. Whatever kids were doing, the adults who collected baseball cards in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s did not care in the slightest about owning the first card of a given player, as opposed to any other card of that player. Also, Steve is incorrect to say that the monthly Beckett guide began in 1980 -- the first issue was not until September 1984, by which time the rookie card craze was in full swing.)

The first time people in the hobby began caring about a player's first card came when Hank Aaron approached and then broke Babe Ruth's career home run record in 1973-74, and for a few years after that. Aaron's 1954 Topps card began commanding a significant premium on the open market, and a lot of old-time collectors were not very happy about it. When Jim Beckett distributed his first card price survey in late 1976, he asked about the price of only one non-rarity star player card -- the 1954 Topps Aaron. When Beckett presented the results of the survey in the March 31, 1977 Sports Collectors Digest, he called it "Aaron's rookie-year card #128" (see footnote 1 on page 50 below), and discussed the controversy over its pricing on the following page. (My full post about Beckett's first price surveys is at http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=216495)



By this time (the mid-to-late 70s), prices of star player cards had begun to rise steadily, and cards from early in the careers of superstars were starting to command the biggest premiums. See my post of Lew Lipset's report on card auction prices in 1977-78, including a June 1978 column focusing on the 1952 Topps Mantle. I don't think the words "rookie card" appear anywhere in these columns:

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=243152

See also these articles from Baseball Hobby News in 1979 about the state of the hobby, including rising prices. I don't think the words "rookie card" appear in these articles either, but editor Frank Barning did discuss the top young players to invest in, which would become a key element of the rookie card craze in the following decade.

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=241548
http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=241741

In 1980-81, the price of the 1952 Topps Mantle skyrocketed beyond what anybody had though possible, and at the same time people started paying more attention to rookie cards of star players, initially just established superstars, but also younger stars. Starting in the early 1980s, the term "rookie card" became more and more prominent in the hobby press, and it expanded into popular knowledge later in the decade when the hobby approached the peak of the boom. I remember all this, because I was an active collector starting in the mid-70s, when the concept of a "rookie card" was essentially unknown, and I was still a very active collector in the early 80s when it became ubiquitous. I may post more about this later, with documentation, but that's the basics.

[Jeffrompa]

Is ugly so that settles that ...

[icollectDCsports]

Originally Posted by trdcrdkid

I remember all this, because I was an active collector starting in the mid-70s, when the concept of a "rookie card" was essentially unknown, and I was still a very active collector in the early 80s when it became ubiquitous. I may post more about this later, with documentation, but that's the basics.

Great info and a joy to read. Thanks for putting all this together and posting.

[steve B]

Nice write up!

I didn't mean that Beckett started in 1980, but that I'd heard the term "rookie card" before then.

One thing I found most interesting was that I'm pretty sure the first time I heard it used was at the first show I went to in early 1978. When I asked why the 54 Aaron was $60 the answer was that it was his rookie card. What's interesting is that that event and your timeline of the term match fairly well.

In the second image in the second Barning article link he mentions the "Jim Rice rookie card"

The first rookie card of a new player I can recall being hyped was Joe Charboneau in 1980.

Finding more on the history of the term might be a nice project, I have a few publications from the 80's, not complete runs, but enough to give a good look. Of course they're all in random boxes somewhere....

Originally Posted by trdcrdkid

Neither Steve nor Jay is 100% correct, but Jay is closer. I don't have time for a full post on this subject (which I've been meaning to write one of these days), but here are the essentials.

As several people have noted, the modern concept of a "rookie card" did not exist in the early hobby. As I documented in a previous post (here: http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=233772), it was not until the mid-1960s that dealers even began consistently charging a premium for cards of star players, let alone "rookie cards". When the term "rookie card" was used in the hobby in the 1960s and 1970s, it referred to those multi-player "Rookie Stars" cards that Topps put out every year during that time. During this period, "sophisticated" collectors took pride in not caring who was pictured on a card, only about how rare it was and whether they needed it for their set.

(By the way, Steve is correct to say that before 1980 most baseball cards were bought by kids -- and that remained true for quite a while after 1980 -- but we're talking about the organized hobby that had existed since the 1930s. Whatever kids were doing, the adults who collected baseball cards in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s did not care in the slightest about owning the first card of a given player, as opposed to any other card of that player. Also, Steve is incorrect to say that the monthly Beckett guide began in 1980 -- the first issue was not until September 1984, by which time the rookie card craze was in full swing.)

The first time people in the hobby began caring about a player's first card came when Hank Aaron approached and then broke Babe Ruth's career home run record in 1973-74, and for a few years after that. Aaron's 1954 Topps card began commanding a significant premium on the open market, and a lot of old-time collectors were not very happy about it. When Jim Beckett distributed his first card price survey in late 1976, he asked about the price of only one non-rarity star player card -- the 1954 Topps Aaron. When Beckett presented the results of the survey in the March 31, 1977 Sports Collectors Digest, he called it "Aaron's rookie-year card #128" (see footnote 1 on page 50 below), and discussed the controversy over its pricing on the following page. (My full post about Beckett's first price surveys is at http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=216495)



By this time (the mid-to-late 70s), prices of star player cards had begun to rise steadily, and cards from early in the careers of superstars were starting to command the biggest premiums. See my post of Lew Lipset's report on card auction prices in 1977-78, including a June 1978 column focusing on the 1952 Topps Mantle. I don't think the words "rookie card" appear anywhere in these columns:

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=243152

See also these articles from Baseball Hobby News in 1979 about the state of the hobby, including rising prices. I don't think the words "rookie card" appear in these articles either, but editor Frank Barning did discuss the top young players to invest in, which would become a key element of the rookie card craze in the following decade.

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=241548
http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=241741

In 1980-81, the price of the 1952 Topps Mantle skyrocketed beyond what anybody had though possible, and at the same time people started paying more attention to rookie cards of star players, initially just established superstars, but also younger stars. Starting in the early 1980s, the term "rookie card" became more and more prominent in the hobby press, and it expanded into popular knowledge later in the decade when the hobby approached the peak of the boom. I remember all this, because I was an active collector starting in the mid-70s, when the concept of a "rookie card" was essentially unknown, and I was still a very active collector in the early 80s when it became ubiquitous. I may post more about this later, with documentation, but that's the basics.

[trdcrdkid]

Originally Posted by steve B

Nice write up!

I didn't mean that Beckett started in 1980, but that I'd heard the term "rookie card" before then.

One thing I found most interesting was that I'm pretty sure the first time I heard it used was at the first show I went to in early 1978. When I asked why the 54 Aaron was $60 the answer was that it was his rookie card. What's interesting is that that event and your timeline of the term match fairly well.

I don't doubt that the term "rookie card" (in the relevant context) existed before 1980; as I pointed out in the post, Jim Beckett referred to Aaron's "rookie year card" in 1977. But the term certainly wasn't very widely used before about 1980 or so.

Originally Posted by steve B

In the second image in the second Barning article link he mentions the "Jim Rice rookie card"

Nice catch! Though it's possible that Barning may have been using the term in its older sense of a multi-player card depicting "Rookie Stars".

Originally Posted by steve B

The first rookie card of a new player I can recall being hyped was Joe Charboneau in 1980.

Finding more on the history of the term might be a nice project, I have a few publications from the 80's, not complete runs, but enough to give a good look. Of course they're all in random boxes somewhere....

I have a lot of hobby publications from 1979-81, including a complete run of SCD and Trader Speaks, and the annual Beckett guides. I'm missing some Baseball Hobby Newses and Card Prices Updates from late 1979 and early-to-mid 1980, but I have enough to do a pretty thorough historical study, if I can find the time one of these days.

[pokerplyr80]

I'm using my phone and accidentally voted for the 52 as Mantle's rookie card. Hopefully the other 17 did the same. There is no definition of a rookie card that I'm aware of that would not consider the 51 Bowman his true and only RC. An auction house including the designation in a description does not change what is or is not a RC.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Steve-You make a good point, but ten or twenty years later when that kid is deciding what to throw away and what to save, which cards do you think will be saved? Also, Carter, Burdick, etc—did they place any significance on rookie cards? I think not. I don’t recall any real hype about rookie cards till the late-1980s/early 1990s. However, your dates may reflect the birth of the term.

It was much earlier. The 1963 Topps Pete Rose was the first hyped "rookie card." By 1979-1980, it was selling for over 100.00. In 1982, it was counterfeited. By 1985, it was over 1000.00.

New rookie cards were definitely being hyped by 1983 (Fleer Ron Kittle) and 1984 (Mattingly and Strawberry). Also with the Cubs reaching the postseason in 1984 for the 1st time since 1945, Ryne Sandberg's 1983 rookies were also being hyped.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Topps itself was designating cards as rookie cards as early as 1960, not sure I understand some of what was posted above about it being n 80s phenomenon.

[CW]

Interesting discussion on the "rookie card" term. Excellent post there, David.

I guess my theory for why the '52 Topps Mantle would ever be considered a "RC" doesn't hold much water since the term did not exist until the late 70s. I figured the specific term "rookie card" wasn't used by collectors in the 50's, but I assumed collectors put importance on a player's first card. I see now that this is not the case.

[Baseball Rarities]

Originally Posted by rats60

It was much earlier. The 1963 Topps Pete Rose was the first hyped "rookie card." By 1979-1980, it was selling for over 100.00. In 1982, it was counterfeited. By 1985, it was over 1000.00.

FWIW, Beckett’s 1985 guide lists the price of a 1963 T Rose in Mint condition at $300.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Baseball Rarities

FWIW, Beckett’s 1985 guide lists the price of a 1963 T Rose in Mint condition at $300.

Rose broke Cobb's hits record in 1985 driving the price of the 1963 Topps Rose through the roof.

[Baseball Rarities]

I think that it already had skyrocketed in anticipation of Rose breaking the record. In comparison, here are a few other notable Mint Card values from the same 1985 guide:

1951 Bowman Mantle $400
1952 Topps Mantle $2,100
1954 Topps Aaron $175
1955 Topps Koufax $60
1955 Topps Clemente $100
1968 Topps Ryan $36

Beckett did not list the 1963 Rose as a $1,000 card in mint condition until 1994.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Baseball Rarities

I think that it already had skyrocketed in anticipation of Rose breaking the record. In comparison, here are a few other notable Mint Card values from the same 1985 guide:

1951 Bowman Mantle $400
1952 Topps Mantle $2,100
1954 Topps Aaron $175
1955 Topps Koufax $60
1955 Topps Clemente $100
1968 Topps Ryan $36

Beckett did not list the 1963 Rose as a $1,000 card in mint condition until 1994.

That's odd because I have the November 1984 price guide, it has Rose at 350 and the rest of those cards all lower at a time when everything was going up in price.

Beckett may not have had it listed for 1k, but mint ones were bringing that. Do you have a monthly from around September 1985 when he broke the record? I know it was at least 700+.

Beckett was slow in those days at raising prices. For example he listed 83T Sandberg at 3.25, but they were 5.00-6.00 all summer long. My guide had 52T Mantle at 1400, yours had it 2100, but I turned down 3000 for mine.

[VoodooChild]

As a 10 year old starting to collect in 1984, rookie cards were definitely being hyped. My local card shop had Rose, Seaver, Brett, Yount RCs, etc. showcased. I don't remember exact prices, but my parents would give me $5 and I know those were out of my league. Even as a 10 year old, I was drawn to the older cards. That shop also had a Clemente RC and I do remember it was $100. I also remember buying some 1960's Clemente's with my $5 budget so I know RCs carried a pretty big premium back then.

My dad did end up buying me that Clemente RC in 1985 for my 11th birthday. Knowing my dad, I'm sure he negotiated and the card (which I still have) is not mint, but we didn't know about price guides back then.

It wasn't until around 1986-87 that I remember the rookie card craze getting out of control.

As for Mantle, the '51 Bowman is what I've always considered his RC.

[Fred]

It's not like the term "rookie" was coined in the 80's. I've been collecting for a while and don't remember people using the term "rookie card" (as people now use it) until the early to mid 80's. Yes, they had cards that had multiple rookies on the same card but I don't recall people calling the first player card (where the player is solo) a "rookie card" back then. That term (rookie card) seems to be used so loosely these days. I've seen people apply it to post cards and other issues that people may not consider cards.

One of the most popular hobby publications was the SCD. Perhaps someone can try to find the time frame when the term "rookie card" was a common ad description.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by rats60

It was much earlier. The 1963 Topps Pete Rose was the first hyped "rookie card." By 1979-1980, it was selling for over 100.00. In 1982, it was counterfeited. By 1985, it was over 1000.00.

New rookie cards were definitely being hyped by 1983 (Fleer Ron Kittle) and 1984 (Mattingly and Strawberry). Also with the Cubs reaching the postseason in 1984 for the 1st time since 1945, Ryne Sandberg's 1983 rookies were also being hyped.

DITTO
And I'll add this to rats60 post....Rose had a great 1979 season with the Phillies (BA= .331). Followed by a great World Series in 1980 (BA= .400) which helped the Phillies win the W.S.
The excitement for Rose's 1963 TOPPS card was unbelievable. At the Willow Grove Show in 1981, it was selling for $100+. I had stocked-up with Rose rookies for that show. They were
all sold Friday nite. I don't recall Rose's rookie card selling for 1000 during the late 1980's. But, I do recall selling them for $500-800 in near Mint condition during that timeframe

In 1977, when I started collecting BB cards again, the 1951 BOWMAN Mickey Mantle card was unknown by many in the hobby.....and, an ExMt card was selling for $50.

In 1977, the 1952 TOPPS Mickey Mantle (ExMt) card was selling for $300-400. And in 1980, it sold for $3000 at an Auction in Philadelphia.

Anyway, the 1951 BOWMAN Mantle is obviously his 1st card (or if you prefer, rookie card).

TED Z

T206 Reference
.