Is Panini flooding the market with 17-18 Silver Prizm RCs?

[the27guy]

Originally Posted by auctionjmm

None. You can't get those in retail and my hobby case had none

Gotcha. I should have looked at your breakdown.

Thanks!

[Jasondr91]

Originally Posted by auctionjmm

So you are putting your money on the guy who opened "several hundred dollars" of.product, but the guy who opened $8,000 is just "lucky"? Okay...

Neither. He's putting his money in a guy he's personally known for 15+ years in this hobby, the same guy who's been in this hobby 3+ decades and has purchased lots of Prizm every year except the 2012 first release. Not some guy on BO who's dropped (is it close to 8k or 8,200? as you've posted) in a product he called "overproduced." You are right about one thing, the product isn't rare what so ever.

Keep in mind, you're trying to educate a guy that's spent what, $500+ in multiple retail figurations, and has what, a plethora of parallel coach cards? Randy's dropped twice as much as me in this product and like many of us, sees the coaches as the common Prizm hits.

None the less, you keep tracking these rookie/coach counts on the first night of 2018, the rest of us will continue to party.

[COMCMax]

Originally Posted by blackandgold

Offered a seller $400 on a gem mint-Auto Decline

You weren't that far off. Anyone wanting to buy GEM's i'd give it a month. Mitchell is up to 20 GEM's via the pop report with nothing lower.

DONOVAN MITCHELL BGS 9.5 2017-18 Prizm SILVER Refractor Rookie RC Jazz ALL 9.5s

[COMCMax]

Looked up some of the main guys on the POP reports. Still a low amount considering how many raw are out there ,but I imagine that number jumps a bit by the end of January.

BGS

Donovan Mitchell 20
Jayson Tatum 9
Lonzo Ball 11
Kyle Kuzma 18
Dennis Smith Jr. 9 + 1 BGS 10
Lauri Markkakanen 5
Markelle Fultz 8

PSA

Donovan Mitchell 0
Jayson Tatum 2
Lonzo Ball 4
Kyle Kuzma 1
Dennis Smith Jr. 1
Lauri Markkakanen 1
Markelle Fultz 1

[auctionjmm]

Originally Posted by Jasondr91

Neither. He's putting his money in a guy he's personally known for 15+ years in this hobby, the same guy who's been in this hobby 3+ decades and has purchased lots of Prizm every year except the 2012 first release. Not some guy on BO who's dropped (is it close to 8k or 8,200? as you've posted) in a product he called "overproduced." You are right about one thing, the product isn't rare what so ever.

Keep in mind, you're trying to educate a guy that's spent what, $500+ in multiple retail figurations, and has what, a plethora of parallel coach cards? Randy's dropped twice as much as me in this product and like many of us, sees the coaches as the common Prizm hits.

None the less, you keep tracking these rookie/coach counts on the first night of 2018, the rest of us will continue to party.

I hated statistics in college but I remember a lot about sample sizes. I think an 8K sample size of Prizm is significant enough to dispel any conspiracy theories that Panini would intentionally tier production of common silver parallels. There is no factual basis to this theory. You guys can't even think of a good reason for Panini to devise such a plan. Also, the break section is filled with breaks that were loaded with rookies, and the other Prizm thread is filled with people continuing to clear out their local stores at every restock because they are doing so well. Heck, this thread started because people noticed how easy the rookies were falling in the first place!

The only logical explanation, which I posted already, is that people are either benefiting or losing out to Panini's notoriously poor collation. Panini has never figured out the collation game. I have no doubts that there are runs of cases with tons of coaches. I also have no doubts that there are runs of cases with tons of rookies. But when you look at total production, across all SKUs, all states, etc...I also have no doubt that all 300 cards in the set have an equal number of silver parallels. That, I am sure of.

I wasn't partying last night because i was working. I have a business to run and don't treat myself to time off often. Not that it matters, but since you mentioned it. But I'll do you a favor and stop bringing sense to this thread. Let the tin foil fly.

[zinger1038]

Originally Posted by auctionjmm

I hated statistics in college but I remember a lot about sample sizes. I think an 8K sample size of Prizm is significant enough to dispel any conspiracy theories that Panini would intentionally tier production of common silver parallels. There is no factual basis to this theory. You guys can't even think of a good reason for Panini to devise such a plan. Also, the break section is filled with breaks that were loaded with rookies, and the other Prizm thread is filled with people continuing to clear out their local stores at every restock because they are doing so well. Heck, this thread started because people noticed how easy the rookies were falling in the first place!

The only logical explanation, which I posted already, is that people are either benefiting or losing out to Panini's notoriously poor collation. Panini has never figured out the collation game. I have no doubts that there are runs of cases with tons of coaches. I also have no doubts that there are runs of cases with tons of rookies. But when you look at total production, across all SKUs, all states, etc...I also have no doubt that all 300 cards in the set have an equal number of silver parallels. That, I am sure of.

I wasn't partying last night because i was working. I have a business to run and don't treat myself to time off often. Not that it matters, but since you mentioned it. But I'll do you a favor and stop bringing sense to this thread. Let the tin foil fly.

Just a quick note about statistics. It's not the larger the sample size is, the "more accurate" results you get. At some point, you'd just be getting closer to the wrong answer with a large sample size.

The election polls hardly ever use a sample size of 10k. I know, they were "wrong" last time.

[auctionjmm]

Originally Posted by zinger1038

Just a quick note about statistics. It's not the larger the sample size is, the "more accurate" results you get. At some point, you'd just be getting closer to the wrong answer with a large sample size.

The election polls hardly ever use a sample size of 10k. I know, they were "wrong" last time.

Not in this case. You are thinking of scientific studies. In an election poll, or tracking print runs, the largest sample size would be the most accurate (ie the election results themselves, or the total print run of a product). Basically if we opened every retail case in production we would know exactly how many silvers. Large sample sizes are good in these cases.

Election polls are small because they are cost effective and the pollers only need to get enough samples for a +/- of 3 or 4 pts.

[DegaBama]

I'll add to this with collation.

My first break of Prizm, from a Wal-Mart (6 Racks, 3 Blasters), produced just as many Silver RCs to Veteran + Coach Silver.

My second break of Prizm, from a Target (5 racks, 3 Blasters, 20 packs), produced just 1 Silver RC.

I saw this last year too. I do think that the products go into streaks, but I don't think there are SP one's. People forget, you are trying to get maybe 10 cards that are HOT, from a 400 card set (counting the inserts). I have hit 40 Silver from about 100 packs, which I think is pretty good. But to get all of the big names, you'd have to bust about 1000 packs (based on getting 40 silver in 100 packs).

[zinger1038]

Originally Posted by auctionjmm

Not in this case. You are thinking of scientific studies. In an election poll, or tracking print runs, the largest sample size would be the most accurate (ie the election results themselves, or the total print run of a product). Basically if we opened every retail case in production we would know exactly how many silvers. Large sample sizes are good in these cases.

Election polls are small because they are cost effective and the pollers only need to get enough samples for a +/- of 3 or 4 pts.

How is polling not a scientific study? The method is similar if not the same. If we can open every retail case, or poll every single person, all statisticians will lose their jobs...

[auctionjmm]

Originally Posted by zinger1038

How is polling not a scientific study? The method is similar if not the same. If we can open every retail case, or poll every single person, all statisticians will lose their jobs...

All I'm saying is large sample sizes ARE good in this case. Your statement that the more cases opened would lead to less accurate results is incorrect.

[27426]

Originally Posted by zinger1038

Just a quick note about statistics. It's not the larger the sample size is, the "more accurate" results you get. At some point, you'd just be getting closer to the wrong answer with a large sample size.

The election polls hardly ever use a sample size of 10k. I know, they were "wrong" last time.

I don't see how you would be getting closer to the wrong answer with a large sample size. It's just the opposite. Because some boxes are uneven, large sample sizes would lead to a more accurate result.

[zinger1038]

Originally Posted by 27426

I don't see how you would be getting closer to the wrong answer with a large sample size. It's just the opposite. Because some boxes are uneven, large sample sizes would lead to a more accurate result.

I was trying to say that you wouldn't need a huge sample size to get the "right" answer. Of course if you bust all the boxes, you know the true odds. That's not practical though.

[27426]

Originally Posted by zinger1038

I was trying to say that you wouldn't need a huge sample size to get the "right" answer. Of course if you bust all the boxes, you know the true odds. That's not practical though.

I wasn't saying you need to open all the boxes. Just saying a large sample size would be more accurate. I would agree with you that small sample size would be enough if the odds are consistent in every box, but since they are inconsistent, it's good to have a large sample size.

[moosetequila]

Originally Posted by 27426

I wasn't saying you need to open all the boxes. Just saying a large sample size would be more accurate. I would agree with you that small sample size would be enough if the odds are consistent in every box, but since they are inconsistent, it's good to have a large sample size.

What if your large sample size was inconsistent as well?

[27426]

Originally Posted by moosetequila

What if your large sample size was inconsistent as well?

Not in this case. The larger the sample size, the more accurate result you will get.

[bcubs]

Originally Posted by COMCMax

Looked up some of the main guys on the POP reports. Still a low amount considering how many raw are out there ,but I imagine that number jumps a bit by the end of January.

BGS

Donovan Mitchell 20
Jayson Tatum 9
Lonzo Ball 11
Kyle Kuzma 18
Dennis Smith Jr. 9 + 1 BGS 10
Lauri Markkakanen 5
Markelle Fultz 8

PSA

Donovan Mitchell 0
Jayson Tatum 2
Lonzo Ball 4
Kyle Kuzma 1
Dennis Smith Jr. 1
Lauri Markkakanen 1
Markelle Fultz 1

I'm hoping those Tatum PSA 10's don't increase in pop too much. Both of those are mine and should be in hand tomorrow or Wednesday. Not sure what to ask for them.

[ShtHairMcGee]

Originally Posted by bcubs

I'm hoping those Tatum PSA 10's don't increase in pop too much. Both of those are mine and should be in hand tomorrow or Wednesday. Not sure what to ask for them.

Best believe you gotta sell them quick cause I've got a couple incoming that will be headed to psa hahaha. Good luck and congrats on the 10s!

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[ThoseBackPages]

if you are selling PSAs, first to market on new stuff is going to get you bigger returns (for the most part) because the PSA pipeline takes longer for them then BGS

[COMCMax]

Originally Posted by bcubs

I'm hoping those Tatum PSA 10's don't increase in pop too much. Both of those are mine and should be in hand tomorrow or Wednesday. Not sure what to ask for them.

Nice, get them up quick. They'll bring a nice premium if the BGS 9.5's are any indicator.

[moellenb]

Prizm Blue RC /199 or Silver RC?

Which is more valuable in the long run?

[zinger1038]

Originally Posted by moellenb

Prizm Blue RC /199 or Silver RC?

Which is more valuable in the long run?

Silver. I know, it doesn't make sense.

[moosetequila]

Originally Posted by moellenb

Prizm Blue RC /199 or Silver RC?

Which is more valuable in the long run?

I'm buying Blue's, sell em' cheap to me!!

[eastbayak]

Delete

[daveyou]

how bout blue ice /99 or silver

really like the blue ice /99s and so far are selling above the silvers but historically, anything minus black or gold does not seem to sell for as much as the silvers (could me wrong)

[ThoseBackPages]

SIlver will be more coveted then all but Gold and Black. POSSIBLY Green will be more loved in the future. Gold because, duh. Black & Green because they both have strong Pedigree