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

[drcy]

Despite the premise of this thread, I don't know of anyone who considers the 52 Topps to be Mantle's rookie card.

[HasselhoffsCheeseburger]

Seems to me, and I'm sure there are technical terms for it, the rookie card phenomenon is simply a natural byproduct to supply and psychology.

As a general observation, there are less 1980 cards than there are 1990, less 1970 than 1980, less 1960 than 1970, and on and on. Seems only natural that we would assume subconsciously that a player's first card is their rarest and be drawn to it above all others.

[Buythatcard]

I saw this excerpt on cardboardconnection.com:

"Baseball Rookie Cards versus 1st Year Prospect

Before the 2006 baseball season, the MLBPA announced some changes that were meant to make defining rookie cards easier. Both Topps and Upper Deck were on board but, honestly, things just got more confusing and a window for a new breed of pre-rookies opened.

With the rule change, official rookie cards were only made after a player appeared on a team's 25-man roster. In its most basic form, it was a great idea. Collectors chase rookie cards when they're first-year players. The rule has had great success in hockey. Although not an official rule, it's like this in basketball and football too as players generally make their team's rosters fresh after the draft and don't spend several years developing in a minor league system."

If we follow this, then the Mantle 51 Bowman is a 1st Year Prospect
card, while the 52 Topps is his Rookie card.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Buythatcard

I saw this excerpt on cardboardconnection.com:

"Baseball Rookie Cards versus 1st Year Prospect

Before the 2006 baseball season, the MLBPA announced some changes that were meant to make defining rookie cards easier. Both Topps and Upper Deck were on board but, honestly, things just got more confusing and a window for a new breed of pre-rookies opened.

With the rule change, official rookie cards were only made after a player appeared on a team's 25-man roster. In its most basic form, it was a great idea. Collectors chase rookie cards when they're first-year players. The rule has had great success in hockey. Although not an official rule, it's like this in basketball and football too as players generally make their team's rosters fresh after the draft and don't spend several years developing in a minor league system."

If we follow this, then the Mantle 51 Bowman is a 1st Year Prospect
card, while the 52 Topps is his Rookie card.

The '51 Bowman Mantle was part of the high number series. The low number series was released mid-April 1951. Mantle made his MLB debut April 17th, 1951. Since the high number series was produced after (look at your definition again) his major league debut, it is his rookie card. Now, if the '51 Bowman Mantle would have been released with the low number series, then it would not be his rookie card because the card was issued before his MLB debut. In that case, the '52 Topps would have been his RC.

[Buythatcard]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

The '51 Bowman Mantle was part of the high number series. The low number series was released mid-April 1951. Mantle made his MLB debut April 17th, 1951. Since the high number series was produced after (look at your definition again) his major league debut, it is his rookie card. Now, if the '51 Bowman Mantle would have been released with the low number series, then it would not be his rookie card because the card was issued before his MLB debut. In that case, the '52 Topps would have been his RC.

Great point David. I was just quoting something I found on the Internet. I think the 51 Bowman is his Rookie card just because it was the first card that he appeared on.

[barrysloate]

When I first came into the hobby in 1982, I remember the hottest card in any dealer's showcase was the Pete Rose rookie. I recall prices is in the $250-300 range, and in some instances the card would be in a dealer's case with a "Not for Sale" sign next to it. It was that big of a deal.

With regard to the Mantle cards, the 1952 Topps is more iconic, more valuable, more aesthetically pleasing, in greater demand, and arguably the most recognized of all post-war baseball cards.

The one thing it isn't, and can never be, is Mantle's rookie card. The 1951 Bowman was issued and released a full year before it, so I see no debate whatsoever.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

The one thing it isn't, and can never be, is Mantle's rookie card. The 1951 Bowman was issued and released a full year before it, so I see no debate whatsoever.

I agree that the '51 Bowman is his rookie card, but the simple fact that it was issued before his '52 Topps is not what makes it his rookie card. It's when the card is issued in relation to his major league debut. As I pointed out, if the card was issued in the low number series (before his major league debut) it would not have been his rookie card. See Howard's post above. His definition of a rookie card is absolutely correct (official rookie cards were only made after a player appeared on a team's 25-man roster). He just had the events out of order.

Derek Jeter's first regular issue card is 1993 Bowman and Topps. Is that his rookie card? He didn't debut until '95. How can you have a rookie card if you're not a rookie?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I agree that the '51 Bowman is his rookie card, but the simple fact that it was issued before his '52 Topps is not what makes it his rookie card. It's when the card is issued in relation to his major league debut. As I pointed out, if the card was issued in the low number series (before his major league debut) it would not have been his rookie card. See Howard's post above. His definition of a rookie card is absolutely correct (official rookie cards were only made after a player appeared on a team's 25-man roster). He just had the events out of order.

Derek Jeter's first regular issue card is 1993 Bowman and Topps. Is that his rookie card? He didn't debut until '95. How can you have a rookie card if you're not a rookie?

Just convention. At least in the 90s, cards such as the Jeter are generally accepted as RCs if they are included in a major issue. E.g. 92 Bowman Mariano Rivera. As for Mantle, the discussion above is probably hypothetical because I doubt in those days Topps or Bowman ever issued a card of someone who had not been on a roster yet. If I am wrong let me know.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Buythatcard

I saw this excerpt on cardboardconnection.com:

"Baseball Rookie Cards versus 1st Year Prospect

Before the 2006 baseball season, the MLBPA announced some changes that were meant to make defining rookie cards easier. Both Topps and Upper Deck were on board but, honestly, things just got more confusing and a window for a new breed of pre-rookies opened.

With the rule change, official rookie cards were only made after a player appeared on a team's 25-man roster. In its most basic form, it was a great idea. Collectors chase rookie cards when they're first-year players. The rule has had great success in hockey. Although not an official rule, it's like this in basketball and football too as players generally make their team's rosters fresh after the draft and don't spend several years developing in a minor league system."

If we follow this, then the Mantle 51 Bowman is a 1st Year Prospect
card, while the 52 Topps is his Rookie card.

What?! That makes no sense. Mantle played 96 games in 1951, starting in mid April.
Cards then weren't issued starting in January, but during the season. So the 51 would have been issued after Mantle was on the roster.