Discussion on overhyped parallels (Genesis, Galactic, Cracked Ice, etc)

[jurule]

I have to say though, the 19/20 pops more than this years. The JB mosaic pattern is darker so the swirl which is the trademark is somewhat more hidden. Cant wait to see the 21/22 release!
Thanks for the feedback

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk

[fabiani12333]

I have one Genesis card. It's a 2019 Team USA version. I like the look of the USA flag design paired with the Genesis design -- it pops. The card is gem mint and I overpaid -- the cards were overpriced the first year due to the pandemic bubble.

Almost all other Mosaic parallels look underwhelming or gimmicky to me. The basic Genesis parallel looks lame to me -- it needs more color. The hexagonal 2020 Mosaic design also looks weak.

The Mosaic refractor design was first used in 1996 Bowman's Best baseball -- it is way overused in Mosaic.

I have multiple Galactic cards. I have always preferred the lattice refractor design of Cosmic -- it pops. The Galactic refractor design is kind of subdued.

I only have cracked ice/crystal inserts -- not base. Base cracked ice is just product filler, like most refractor parallels.

[oldschooled]

Galactic is overhyped lol. As of the market right now, Galactics are actually underrated. Overhyped prizms outselling Galactics atm.

[Lone Wulf]

Now that some time has gone by and things have simmered in my brain a bit more, I think the main issue with the Galactic and Genesis parallels for me specifically is that I am not a huge fan of either Revolution or Mosaic as sets more generally. So taking a non-numbered parallel that do not look that great to me and having their value be so high creates a disconnect in my mind.

I own basically no Mosaic cards at all, just not a fan of the set and I would rather spend my money elsewhere, and for Revolution I own two cards: PSA 10 Luka base Revolution and a PSA 10 Anthony Edwards Fractal. I like the design of Revolution, but it occurred to me that that foil pattern changing for the parallels makes them all much more ambiguous and harder to differentiate compared to changing patterns + colors like other sets do. If you showed me 5 different Revolution parallels of the same player and asked me to rank them or say which is the best, I would have no idea, they are all shiny and look very similar to me.

As an example, here is the Luka base Revolution vs Luka Galactic.



If you do a lot of research and memorize every parallel pattern, maybe Galactic stands out more, but from a purely aesthetic view, I would say the Galactic looks better here, but not by that much. So now we look at value, last eBay sale Base PSA 10 came in at $350, last eBay sale Galactic PSA 9 came in at $6400. That is when I start wonder why.

As a comparison to the 90s, they had some somewhat similar parallels to SSP Galactics. I'll use Kevin Garnett's Upper Deck Electric Court Gold rookie as an example. The same argument applies over aesthetics, the Electric Court and Electric Court Gold look very similar, you have to really look to see the difference between the two (different color parallel type font). Those were super tough to pull, if I have the history right those were 1:27 packs with a 360 card checklist. There are 28 Kevin Garnett Electric Court Gold cards graded by PSA, zero 10s, and I own one of the eight PSA 9's. That card cost me $300. I realize I am blending a lot of nuance or other arguments into this (90s vs ultra modern prices mainly), but that is kind of where I am coming from when I see a $6400 price tag on the Luka Galactic.

The one devil's advocate point I will make in response to myself and everything I just said, is that with there being sooo many more rookie card versions these days, I do see the logic in assigning a super high value to the cards that matter most. So if you really believe Galactic is one of the few cards that really really matter, then sure assign a huge value to it and pool your funds to get that instead of a bunch of lower end stuff. I can get behind that.

Sorry if I come off as basic. I am just one opinion in the sea of many, everyone else can have their own opinions and I obviously can't go against what the overall market dictates. I just picked up my first Luka rookie auto at the last Dallas Card Show and it took more funds / trade value than I usually ever spend on a single card (I just really wanted one in my collection), and even that was only about half as much as what the Galactic goes for. The Luka Galactic is worth more than any single card in my collection though, so what do I know. I could easily be putting too much personal bias into things and ignoring what the actual market is. Anyway, props to anyone that actually read all of that, was fun to think about.

[sebreg]

I think it's hard to assess Galactics' aesthetic qualities via photos, they are more easily appreciated via reels/video imo. I think Galactics are one of the few stand-out Panini-era parallels. I'm also a fan of early white sparkles. That said I tend to think Panini has watered down their gold parallels along with parallels in general via their overuse and overreliance on them. But if I was purely betting and had to choose a Panini parallel I'd prob go with early Galactics.

[tjforce]

Originally Posted by Lone Wulf

Now that some time has gone by and things have simmered in my brain a bit more, I think the main issue with the Galactic and Genesis parallels for me specifically is that I am not a huge fan of either Revolution or Mosaic as sets more generally. So taking a non-numbered parallel that do not look that great to me and having their value be so high creates a disconnect in my mind.

I own basically no Mosaic cards at all, just not a fan of the set and I would rather spend my money elsewhere, and for Revolution I own two cards: PSA 10 Luka base Revolution and a PSA 10 Anthony Edwards Fractal. I like the design of Revolution, but it occurred to me that that foil pattern changing for the parallels makes them all much more ambiguous and harder to differentiate compared to changing patterns + colors like other sets do. If you showed me 5 different Revolution parallels of the same player and asked me to rank them or say which is the best, I would have no idea, they are all shiny and look very similar to me.

As an example, here is the Luka base Revolution vs Luka Galactic.



If you do a lot of research and memorize every parallel pattern, maybe Galactic stands out more, but from a purely aesthetic view, I would say the Galactic looks better here, but not by that much. So now we look at value, last eBay sale Base PSA 10 came in at $350, last eBay sale Galactic PSA 9 came in at $6400. That is when I start wonder why.

As a comparison to the 90s, they had some somewhat similar parallels to SSP Galactics. I'll use Kevin Garnett's Upper Deck Electric Court Gold rookie as an example. The same argument applies over aesthetics, the Electric Court and Electric Court Gold look very similar, you have to really look to see the difference between the two (different color parallel type font). Those were super tough to pull, if I have the history right those were 1:27 packs with a 360 card checklist. There are 28 Kevin Garnett Electric Court Gold cards graded by PSA, zero 10s, and I own one of the eight PSA 9's. That card cost me $300. I realize I am blending a lot of nuance or other arguments into this (90s vs ultra modern prices mainly), but that is kind of where I am coming from when I see a $6400 price tag on the Luka Galactic.

The one devil's advocate point I will make in response to myself and everything I just said, is that with there being sooo many more rookie card versions these days, I do see the logic in assigning a super high value to the cards that matter most. So if you really believe Galactic is one of the few cards that really really matter, then sure assign a huge value to it and pool your funds to get that instead of a bunch of lower end stuff. I can get behind that.

Sorry if I come off as basic. I am just one opinion in the sea of many, everyone else can have their own opinions and I obviously can't go against what the overall market dictates. I just picked up my first Luka rookie auto at the last Dallas Card Show and it took more funds / trade value than I usually ever spend on a single card (I just really wanted one in my collection), and even that was only about half as much as what the Galactic goes for. The Luka Galactic is worth more than any single card in my collection though, so what do I know. I could easily be putting too much personal bias into things and ignoring what the actual market is. Anyway, props to anyone that actually read all of that, was fun to think about.

Originally Posted by sebreg

I think it's hard to assess Galactics' aesthetic qualities via photos, they are more easily appreciated via reels/video imo. I think Galactics are one of the few stand-out Panini-era parallels. I'm also a fan of early white sparkles. That said I tend to think Panini has watered down their gold parallels along with parallels in general via their overuse and overreliance on them. But if I was purely betting and had to choose a Panini parallel I'd prob go with early Galactics.

Judging the look of Galactics by using a static picture on the internet vs holding one in your hand is like judging how big Shaq is by looking at a picture of his standing by himself, with no frame of reference, vs standing right next to him.

[drobfan8]

The best thing about cards is ambiguity though.

If you want to be like everyone else, buy a Prizm Silver.

I still remember almost everyone dumping on 2012 Prizm ans calling it a cheap knock off of Topps Chrome.

Flawless Diamonds also got dumped on. Gala /8 also.

Talking about the 90s, Hoops Starting 5 is one of the most overrated and boring sets of all time. But see how much a top name sells for.

Mosaic Genesis are just incredibly nice in hand.

Galactics have enough of a following and are Rare enough that even if 90% of the Hobby hatned them, they will still become scarce and be driven up in value.

And yes, like others have mentioned snapping a picture without any kind of lighting is not the best idea for any Revolution card.

I personally do think Cracked Ice cards don't look that great and are overrated. But I just will buy things I do like.

[1980bust]

2019 Genesis look so nice. Galactics look awesome too, but I think most Revolution parallels look awesome anyway.

Speaking of silver Prizms, I saw a post on Reddit about Zion One and One base RCs selling for less than Prizm Silver PSA 10s of which there's like 1500(?), and the consensus there was that the PSA 10 silver was much more desirable and that scarcity doesn't mean anything.

[Dame]

Originally Posted by 1980bust

Speaking of silver Prizms, I saw a post on Reddit about Zion One and One base RCs selling for less than Prizm Silver PSA 10s of which there's like 1500(?), and the consensus there was that the PSA 10 silver was much more desirable and that scarcity doesn't mean anything.

I don’t agree considering how nice the inaugural One and One base sets are but I see it. 5 years from now, I think people will appreciate One and One more. Panini nailed everything with that set.

[1980bust]

Originally Posted by Dame

I don’t agree considering how nice the inaugural One and One base sets are but I see it. 5 years from now, I think people will appreciate One and One more. Panini nailed everything with that set.

Same. I have almost no interest in a Zion Prizm silver, but that One and One looks so good.

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by tjforce

Judging the look of Galactics by using a static picture on the internet vs holding one in your hand is like judging how big Shaq is by looking at a picture of his standing by himself, with no frame of reference, vs standing right next to him.

Solid analogy. Scans do even less to show off Revolution parallels than photos taken with a phone or camera. I initially thought Galactics were lame using the same logic about still photos. I don’t remember which one I bought first, but once I got one in hand it all made sense. Some people still aren’t impressed with them in hand. Some of the Galactic cards pop less than others, especially certain inserts like the 17-18 Vortex, and some people simply don’t like them no matter what, but the analogy above is spot on.

[AutoPatchRookie]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

Solid analogy. Scans do even less to show off Revolution parallels than photos taken with a phone or camera. I initially thought Galactics were lame using the same logic about still photos. I don’t remember which one I bought first, but once I got one in hand it all made sense. Some people still aren’t impressed with them in hand. Some of the Galactic cards pop less than others, especially certain inserts like the 17-18 Vortex, and some people simply don’t like them no matter what, but the analogy above is spot on.

The lighting thing applies to cracked ice cards as well. They look much better/colorful under bright lights and video. Indeed this also applies to regular Prizm cards but to a lesser extent.

[sebreg]

I'd love to build the inaugural One and One base set, that would be a fun project I'm just not a big fan of spending significant amounts on younger guys. There are quite a few Panini #d base sets that I like (working on a few set builds atm), 17 Opulence is another one I'm looking at in terms of post-2016 #d base sets.

Regarding Galatics, TJforce's analogy is perfectly on the mark. And as DRob mentioned that set has a strong enough collector base given the supply that I'd feel comfortable betting on them, and suspect they will have a continuing organic growth of their collector base. Especially the earlier Galactics, the later ones the print runs seem higher which is why I'd be a bit more leery of those if one is spending significant amounts. One of my personal favorite cards is the 15 Galactic Showstoppers Bron, I don't own it (or any Galactics for that matter) but def one that would be amazing to have. Another nice thing with that inaugural Revolution set is there are only 3 parallels, and for the Showstoppers only two (Cosmic, also looks great, and Galactic).

[tyrith]

I've held Galactics. In most years, in terms of pure aesthetics, I think the base cards look better. It's okay to disagree, and for something that SSP it only really needs a niche that's ready to spend, but I'm not the target.

[sebreg]

Originally Posted by tyrith

I've held Galactics. In most years, in terms of pure aesthetics, I think the base cards look better. It's okay to disagree, and for something that SSP it only really needs a niche that's ready to spend, but I'm not the target.

For sure, would be boring if we all agreed on everything haha.