Idiocy = The Ultimate Rookie Card Encyclopedia

[MattyC]

So apparently there's this book out there whose title is written above. And in this book-- which purports to be a legitimate if not official hobby resource-- they make some outrageous calls. For one, Ruth's RC is designated as his 1933 Goudeys. In short, I now have a headache from this "encyclopedia."

[Rich Klein]

The 48-75 (or whatever year I went up to) short hits are quite good (I wrote them Just skip anything before 1941

Rich

[ethicsprof]

you could always retitle it 'penultimate.'


you have a lot of publications! you'd be a lock for tenure almost anywhere!
all the best, ole buddy

barry

[MattyC]

Rich,

Sorry, but my brain seized up at 1933 Goudey as Ruth's RC. If you have juice with those folks behind the book, maybe next edition they can get it sorted out on the pre-war front! And I have really enjoyed your ramblings, btw-- fun column.

Best,

Matt

[ullmandds]

Matt... I will gladly trade you one of my goudeys for your "rookie"!

[Orioles1954]

Not every player has a rookie card. Quite simply, it is a card released in the player's debut season.

[glynparson]

It was probably defined somewhere in the text and may explain some of the idiocy. Remember if this is Beckett and it stuck to its modern definition of rookie card it is going to have some huge gaps on prewar. Not many nationally distributed prewar cards, most were regional. I agree they should modify this for prewar but if the criteria is stated I guess they should get some credit for actually sticking to it even when it makes them look a little foolish to a knowledgable prewar collector.

[Rich Klein]

Look, it was an idea that did not work out (you can use ther search tool on this site to see the reviews when this book came out)

Obvioulsy, with very few exceptions there are no real easily defined rookie cards for pre-war cards. To me 1939 Ted WIlliams and 1941 Pee Wee Reese are OK and very few others. If this book had been successful, we would have adapted the post-WW2 stance (the goudey RCs would be gone) and just printed the book in a second volume using 1948-present. Good attempt, we worked hard on the volume, but did not sell worthy of doing the book again.

And yes I did write many of those "rookie" blurbs

Rich