Wander Franco Rookie Card Debate (2021 Bowman's Best vs. 2022 RC logo cards)

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by rngrdanny22

The arrogance of a know-it-all!

Been here since page 1 bro. Catch up!

[rngrdanny22]

Originally Posted by BigSeph

Been here since page 1 bro. Catch up!

[forest]

Originally Posted by Pacmeyer

How so? I mean that's exactly why this set is so much fun... like being a kid in a candy store.



These weren't done at kinko's. Cards are their bread and butter.

Originally Posted by pspa123

Can I make a coherent argument that 21 BB is Wander's RC but NOT Witt's, based on the fact that Wander was already in the bigs?

This would be the place to make it if anywhere, let's hear it!

[ThoseBackPages]

cloc is a flipper, dont mind him

[NYRE2PECT]

Originally Posted by forest

It's honestly a really intriguing debate. And it's gonna be controversial for many years to come. Much more interesting than 99% of the posts which are just people showing off pick-ups and discussing release dates.

I know it is.

If you knew me, you would know that I am literally (L-I-T-E-R-A-L-L-Y) amazed at how long this topic has lasted. It's fascinating.

And, I am glad that you found your niche. Discussing release dates and pictures of baseball cards in a baseball forum is clearly boring.

[Pacmeyer]

Originally Posted by BigSeph

Been here since page 1 bro. Catch up!

In all fairness this thread sort of needs the BB bashers and know-it-alls to keep it going. The discussion wouldn't be nearly as fun without them

[forest]

Originally Posted by NYRE2PECT

I know it is.

If you knew me, you would know that I am literally (L-I-T-E-R-A-L-L-Y) amazed at how long this topic has lasted. It's fascinating.

And, I am glad that you found your niche. Discussing release dates and pictures of baseball cards in a baseball forum is clearly boring.

Didn't mean to imply they were boring, just much more plentiful on here than a unique topic like this.

[rngrdanny22]

Originally Posted by Pacmeyer

In all fairness this thread sort of needs the BB bashers and know-it-alls to keep it going. The discussion wouldn't be nearly as fun without them

I'll agree, that if we weren't here, this thread would absolutely devolve into which one of you guys could buy more copies and pumping the cards to figure out how you can manipulate the market price in your favors.

[forest]

Originally Posted by rngrdanny22

I'll agree, that if we weren't here, this thread would absolutely devolve into which one of you guys could buy more copies and pumping the cards to figure out how you can manipulate the market price in your favors.

Almost everyone on here who's said they're buying 21 BB has said they're doing so for long-term holds. When did the pump and dump narrative start?

[rngrdanny22]

Originally Posted by forest

Almost everyone on here who's said they're buying 21 BB has said they're doing so for long-term holds. When did the pump and dump narrative start?

That's cute.

[forest]

Originally Posted by rngrdanny22

That's cute.

Good point, thanks for your input.

[rngrdanny22]

Originally Posted by forest

Good point, thanks for your input.

You're welcome.

[Pacmeyer]

Originally Posted by rngrdanny22

I'll agree, that if we weren't here, this thread would absolutely devolve into which one of you guys could buy more copies and pumping the cards to figure out how you can manipulate the market price in your favors.

Haven't heard that particular argument much except maybe a million times already... seriously, were you on a deserted island all these weeks?

And if you'd actually read more than a couple pages back, you'd realize not everyone here is strictly a BB50er, LogoBois, or flipper.

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by forest

This would be the place to make it if anywhere, let's hear it!

Well that was my argument, that Witt doesn't check one of what seems to now be a well-established box that an RC be issued after a player is in the bigs. But Wander of course does.

[ThoseBackPages]

Originally Posted by pspa123

Well that was my argument, that Witt doesn't check one of what seems to now be a well-established box that an RC be issued after a player is in the bigs. But Wander of course does.

[ThoseBackPages]

Jeter had not played in the MLB when his RCs were released

[forest]

Originally Posted by pspa123

Well that was my argument, that Witt doesn't check one of what seems to now be a well-established box that an RC be issued after a player is in the bigs. But Wander of course does.

I agree that pretty much all RCs at this point occur after a player's debut. After 2006 it's basically never happened, until now.

It's buried many pages back in this thread at this point, but there are plenty of examples from card history of rookie cards from before players made the bigs. Less so in the ultramodern era, but some historic examples are:

1985 Topps Mark McGwire
1990 Topps Frank Thomas
1991 Topps Chipper Jones
1993 Topps Derek Jeter
1993 Topps Todd Helton
2002 Topps Joe Mauer
2006 Topps Alex Gordon (kind of an oddball example with an entire separate history)

Those are just off the top of my head, there are plenty more.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

The MLBPA license is definitely the most interesting anti-21BB argument, but I don't think it's sufficient, for these reasons.

1. Your argument means all the cards in Panini baseball that people think are RCs really aren't. We have several years of precedent of people thinking they are RCs, so that seems like a problem.

2. Topps and MLBPA's agreement included language to avoid the problem we're currently discussing, about how prospects would be handled in Bowman sets and not numbered with veteran cards. They followed those rules very carefully for 15 years, and then suddenly didn't. If following those rules didn't matter, why have they been doing it? Why didn't they just give the cards a different design or put the word "prospect" on it? Or rely on the absence of the MLBPA logo to have the final say? They didn't do that because the checklist does matter. Why did Topps make 2021 Bowman Heritage disappear?

3. Finally I'm not sure why we should cede control of the definition of a rookie card to the MLBPA. They should conform to our standards (which they have, until now) not the other way around. The agreement was a good one, it makes sense to release RCs when the player actually debuts. But in this one instance, Topps didn't do that. They released them before they debuted, logo or not. It's perfectly fine for Topps and MLBPA to have control of when the logo appears, that's their business. But it's never been up to them to decide what is a rookie card and what is not. When Sporting News and American Caramel and Goudey were making baseball cards, were they deciding to make rookie cards? No, they were just making baseball cards. We took over from there. And we're still in charge. There's no hobby without the hobbyists.

Weird you spent so long typing here, these “points” are nonsense.

The licensors set the general rules by which everyone else plays along. Otherwise you’re welcome to buy unlicensed cards.

Thankfully Fanatics is really tight with its licensors.

[ThoseBackPages]

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by ThoseBackPages

Jeter had not played in the MLB when his RCs were released

Rules were different pre 2006. There are countless examples like Jeter. Not the point, IMO.

[pspa123]

Originally Posted by forest

I agree that pretty much all RCs at this point occur after a player's debut. After 2006 it's basically never happened, until now.

It's buried many pages back in this thread at this point, but there are plenty of examples from card history of rookie cards from before players made the bigs. Less so in the ultramodern era, but some historic examples are:

1985 Topps Mark McGwire
1990 Topps Frank Thomas
1991 Topps Chipper Jones
1993 Topps Derek Jeter
1993 Topps Todd Helton
2002 Topps Joe Mauer
2006 Topps Alex Gordon (kind of an oddball example with an entire separate history)

Those are just off the top of my head, there are plenty more.

Yes and has been discussed, the rules were different pre 2006, then it was a question of first national set. And common to have cards of kids in those sets years before they played. That changed in 2006.

[JRX]

The 2022 base will be junk, the numbered parallels may go for even more than expected because with topps printing so damn much of this that they'll be near impossible to pull. Each one is like a lotto ticket.

I'm not sure what has changed here, but keep fighting, maybe we can take down the poject 2020 thread if Wander has a hof career.

[SupermanBrandon]

This is THE OFFICIAL Wander thread

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by pspa123

Well that was my argument, that Witt doesn't check one of what seems to now be a well-established box that an RC be issued after a player is in the bigs. But Wander of course does.

MLB debut is supposed to be the trigger for receiving the logo, but historically the rookie card definition has nothing to do with MLB debut. Many players have had RCs a year or even multiple years before they debuted.

[Pacmeyer]

Originally Posted by pspa123

Well that was my argument, that Witt doesn't check one of what seems to now be a well-established box that an RC be issued after a player is in the bigs. But Wander of course does.

Exactly what makes these cards so sneaky (unless chalking it all up to just human error). They're not supposed to exist in their current form and that's why speculating about the "why" is so incredibly interesting.