Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards Discussion

Lucas00 · #1 02-23-2023, 08:28 PM

I'll throw my opinion in the ring on what I consider a rookie card.

Essentially any release whether it be a premium, post card, bread label, playing card, ice cream lid, notebook cover, I don't care. As long as it's made of paper and was distributed to at least a small amount of people. That is a rookie card to me.
Minor league issues also would count imo.

Things such as Snapshots and Press photos and some unique rppcs that were created for Personal or News use I don't count as rookies. Simply because they weren't meant for distribution.

doug.goodman · #2 10-11-2023, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucas00

I'll throw my opinion in the ring on what I consider a rookie card.

Essentially any release whether it be a premium, post card, bread label, playing card, ice cream lid, notebook cover, I don't care. As long as it's made of paper and was distributed to at least a small amount of people. That is a rookie card to me.
Minor league issues also would count imo.

Things such as Snapshots and Press photos and some unique rppcs that were created for Personal or News use I don't count as rookies. Simply because they weren't meant for distribution.

I agree, except the minor league issues.

oldjudge · #3 10-12-2023, 09:38 AM

Agree, except I think pins should also count--hello Cameo Pepsin

Yoda · #4 10-12-2023, 10:52 AM

An example of just what we are discussing occurred in Al's last LOTG auction. I consigned a Fleishman Casey Stengel with coupon graded SGC 1.5, which I believed to be his first MLB card. The result was somewhat disappointing. Shortly thereafter, SB in his auction offered up an Old Mill T210 Casey, which got a lot of attention and did well.
Just an example of the complexity of this issue.

darwinbulldog · #5 10-13-2023, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoda

An example of just what we are discussing occurred in Al's last LOTG auction. I consigned a Fleishman Casey Stengel with coupon graded SGC 1.5, which I believed to be his first MLB card. The result was somewhat disappointing. Shortly thereafter, SB in his auction offered up an Old Mill T210 Casey, which got a lot of attention and did well.
Just an example of the complexity of this issue.

It is his first MLB card and is therefore worthy of designation as his rookie card. That said, minor league cards, particularly scarce ones from popular sets that predate a player's MLB debut are understandably more expensive than the same players' later rookie cards, but I think one of the issues the hobby is close to a consensus on (and with which I agree) is that a card issued prior to the year of a player's rookie season is not a rookie card -- though as I've pointed out a few times there are more than a few -- what's a nicer word for hypocrites? -- who claim to agree but also think that Derek Jeter has a rookie card from 1993.

bcbgcbrcb · #6 10-13-2023, 12:28 PM

To me, the parameters for what constitutes a rookie card are very clearly defined here. There is no debate that the 1903 Allegheny Frank Selee is his rookie card. Given that the entire set is believed to have only one copy of each card in existence, it is a monumental accomplishment for the one individual in the world that owns it. Since this set was a prototype and never reached the commercial distribution stage, it is extremely unlikely that another set will ever surface. The same can be said for the 1894 Alpha Photo Engraving Baltimore cards which include 4 Hall of Fame rookie cards: John McGraw, Joe Kelley, Hughie Jennings and Wee Willie Keeler (unconfirmed). Only one set is known to exist, always possible one or more could turn up but after 130 years, probably not. I don’t know if the same individual owns all of these cards or they are owned by multiple collectors. Again, kudos to the owner of each, nobody else will ever own one of these unless the owner decided to part with them. There are other similar scenarios such as the 1893 Just So Tobacco Cy Young and Jesse Burkett. I think there might be a second or possibly third copy of a player or two from that set. Again, an impossible task to find one of these. So we as HOF rookie card collectors can either accept the fact that we can never obtain every one and move on with collecting them anyway or we come up with the next best thing (although it might not be the true rookie card, it allows us to continue the chase).

Shankweather · #7 10-13-2023, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

It is his first MLB card and is therefore worthy of designation as his rookie card. That said, minor league cards, particularly scarce ones from popular sets that predate a player's MLB debut are understandably more expensive than the same players' later rookie cards, but I think one of the issues the hobby is close to a consensus on (and with which I agree) is that a card issued prior to the year of a player's rookie season is not a rookie card -- though as I've pointed out a few times there are more than a few -- what's a nicer word for hypocrites? -- who claim to agree but also think that Derek Jeter has a rookie card from 1993.

One way to unify that is to go by the set, not the player. Only consider cards from MLB sets. That would eliminate minor league cards (1914 Baltimore News, 1980 TCMA) but allow for pre-debut RCs like 93 Jeter, 85 McGwire, and 60 Yastrzemski.

bcbgcbrcb · #8 10-13-2023, 03:05 PM

Exactly, Stephen. The same goes all the way back to the 1880’s and N172’s. They were issued primarily for the Major Leaguers of the day but also included numerous minor leaguers as well. Handling this way qualifies rookie cards like Kid Nichols and others.

Shankweather · #9 10-13-2023, 03:19 PM

One issue I have with ultra-rare sets like W600 and E107 are the incomplete checklists. E107 says on the back there are 150 cards in the set, but only 148 have been identified. Today I'm assuming that T206 is Carl Lundgren's rookie card (it's not Allegheny!), but what if tomorrow someone discovers he was in E107?

Same with W600. Because of the way it was distributed, you could never know for sure which players were in the set, and thus our rookie card list could always be subject to change. Which seems problematic.

rhettyeakley · #10 10-14-2023, 04:07 PM

People always make this subject way more complicated than it really needs to be.

I personally want the first distributed collectible featuring that player (hopefully by themselves) doesn’t matter if it is a card, a disk, a pin, a leather, a stamp, or an 8x10 team issue.

The parameters we all put are all by their nature completely arbitrary and will make sense only to the person making them.

I will tell you this…the criteria used by Beckett are insanely stupid. They list Babe’s 1933 Goudey as his rookie! Insanely stupid!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pre-War Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards - Who Collects Them?	bcbgcbrcb	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	33	01-05-2023 11:22 AM
Way to Collect Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards	bcbgcbrcb	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	07-03-2012 07:28 PM
SOLD: Lot of (5) Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards	bcbgcbrcb	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	1	06-01-2012 04:08 PM
SOLD: (5) -Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards (ALL SGC GRADED)	bcbgcbrcb	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	1	07-12-2011 09:45 PM
For Sale: Baseball Hall of Fame Rookie Cards	bcbgcbrcb	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	06-14-2011 07:59 AM