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

[fabiani12333]

His 2021 Best card was released after his first full season. After he qualified for rookie status. After he finished second in ROY. It's a base card. It depicts him in action in a Rays uniform.

It's his rookie card, as far as his Best card goes. At this point, it would be silly to claim his 2022 Best base card is his true rookie card.

His flagship and chrome are a different matter -- the 2022 releases will be his rookie cards.

[scaar]

Originally Posted by LittleJimmies

I don't believe in this being Wander's RC simply because it is driven entirely by not being an "insert" anymore due to a card numbering mistake (or huge card numbering conspiracy as some people are claiming) in a set that it's silly to claim prospect cards were ever an insert. I will give it credit as a standalone card in its own weird hybrid prospect/RC grey space and think it ultimately slots below 1st and the main 2022 RC logo cards, but above non-1st prospect cards and low-level 2022 RC logo cards.

And people really need to stop referencing Beckett as some sort of authority in this. Sure, they have rules, but those rule are so disconnected from what collectors ascribe to now and are themselves inconsistent. I had no idea how Beckett classified rookie cards, or that them classifying cards on their own was even a thing anyone was supposed to care about. But when those rules state that 2018 Acuna Sapphire Bat Down is not a RC, but 2021 Bowman's Best Cristian Hernandez is, those rules simply don't work.

This is very well stated. While Beckett can provide some useful information i don't rely on them to define the market for me. I hope folks don't put a ton if money into these as I agree, the value will likely fade when 2022 releases hit the market. Purchase what you like and spend what you're comfortable with.

[LittleJimmies]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

Not that absurd when you consider 1985 McGwire or 1991 Chipper Jones or 1993 Jeter. It used to be fairly common for RCs to appear years before the player debuted. Baseball cards weren't invented in 2006.

There is no comparing today's hobby to that of 30 years ago on this topic because of the emergence of prospecting. And that is the point of times changing and Beckett's definition not changing with the industry leaving their rules meaningless to me. Again, think about it outside of Wander. So Cristian Hernandez had his 1st in Chrome, a couple prospect cards in Draft and Inception, his RC on Best, then he'll have 3 years of prospect cards again, and then his 2nd year pro cards when he is an actual rookie in 2025? That fits the nobody's current meaning and spirit of an RC.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by hoos

This is an interesting opinion, but not borne out by the facts. The 2005 Verlander PSA 10 is worth more than twice what the 2006 PSA 10 is worth, despite having twice the pop count. Also, the gap widened between the two over the last year. It did not narrow.

Price does not determine rookie card status, why think otherwise? Are you trying to read off old 2002 program notes attempting to sway potential buyers? If so, the notes have been replaced.

Verlander’s 2005 itself specifies exactly what it is: a first year card.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

Not that absurd when you consider 1985 McGwire or 1991 Chipper Jones or 1993 Jeter. It used to be fairly common for RCs to appear years before the player debuted. Baseball cards weren't invented in 2006.

No, it wasn’t common. Furthermore, none of the players you mentioned looked like MLB players. Topps didn’t really start to abuse the whole ‘prospect looking like a MLB player’ until 1995, and was told to stop doing that just a decade later.

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by MoreToppsPlease

No, it wasn’t common. Furthermore, none of the players you mentioned looked like MLB players. Topps didn’t really start to abuse the whole ‘prospect looking like a MLB player’ until 1995, and was told to stop doing that just a decade later.

It was very common for players to have their RC a year or even two years before their debut. It was normal. Can you think of a player in the 90s that had his RC in the year AFTER his debut, like Wander is going to have? It's ridiculous that Topps does it this way.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "looked like MLB players." Unless they were in a USA uniform like Helton or Nomar, all these players were in major league uniforms on their pre-debut RCs. Except for weirdo 92 Bowman.

[vwnut13]

Originally Posted by oraclesports

Since when do you care about non rookie logo cards? Since when did you buy a juan soto non rookie logo card and pretend it is a rookie?

Back in the old days, when the RC logo rules had some integrity, Wander Franco's 2022 cards would have been ineligible for the RC logo.

[speedyjg13]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

It was very common for players to have their RC a year or even two years before their debut. It was normal. Can you think of a player in the 90s that had his RC in the year AFTER his debut, like Wander is going to have? It's ridiculous that Topps does it this way.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "looked like MLB players." Unless they were in a USA uniform like Helton or Nomar, all these players were in major league uniforms on their pre-debut RCs. Except for weirdo 92 Bowman.

I cannot

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by LittleJimmies

There is no comparing today's hobby to that of 30 years ago on this topic because of the emergence of prospecting. And that is the point of times changing and Beckett's definition not changing with the industry leaving their rules meaningless to me. Again, think about it outside of Wander. So Cristian Hernandez had his 1st in Chrome, a couple prospect cards in Draft and Inception, his RC on Best, then he'll have 3 years of prospect cards again, and then his 2nd year pro cards when he is an actual rookie in 2025? That fits the nobody's current meaning and spirit of an RC.

I'm not arguing that Topps was right to do this. This is a mess, especially for players like Hernandez. But nothing changes the fact that Hernandez is on a base card in an MLB regular set in 2021. That's a rookie card. His (RC) cards in 2025 or whatever might be more desirable, but they won't be true RCs.

[Bcr]

Originally Posted by LittleJimmies

There is no comparing today's hobby to that of 30 years ago on this topic because of the emergence of prospecting. And that is the point of times changing and Beckett's definition not changing with the industry leaving their rules meaningless to me. Again, think about it outside of Wander. So Cristian Hernandez had his 1st in Chrome, a couple prospect cards in Draft and Inception, his RC on Best, then he'll have 3 years of prospect cards again, and then his 2nd year pro cards when he is an actual rookie in 2025? That fits the nobody's current meaning and spirit of an RC.

Exactly. Every example feels like a "Well back in my day" and it just doesn't work for todays standards. It makes NO SENSE, but you know "Rules is rules..."

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by Bcr

Exactly. Every example feels like a "Well back in my day" and it just doesn't work for todays standards. It makes NO SENSE, but you know "Rules is rules..."

But if we're talking about what "makes sense," it makes sense for Wander's RC to be in the year he debuted, not the year after. The "RC" logo is BS, it holds no sway with me. But there has to be some kind of standard for this, and the traditional standard of, you know, FIRST MLB CARD, makes a lot more sense to me than the arbitrary application of that logo.

[Archangel1775]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

Can you think of a player in the 90s that had his RC in the year AFTER his debut, like Wander is going to have? It's ridiculous that Topps does it this way.

Sammy Sosa MLB Debut June 16,1989, Rookie Cards 1990
XRC 1989 Donruss Baseball's Best

Larry Walker MLB Debut August 16,1989 Rookie Cards 1990.

Juan Gonzalez
David Justice
John Olerud

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by Archangel1775

Sammy Sosa MLB Debut June 16,1989, Rookie Cards 1990
XRC 1989 Bowman's Best

Larry Walker MLB Debut August 16,1989 Rookie Cards 1990

Plus Sheffield and Olerud and others. From 1991 on its pretty much unheard of.

[BabaORiley]

Oh sorry, I just noticed "RC" listed as such. Yeah, I'll be after both if we're not talking strict RC.

[Archangel1775]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

Plus Sheffield and Olerud and others. From 1991 on its pretty much unheard of.

Due to competition if you look at what each was releasing at the end of the year. In 1991 Upper Deck had Final Update, Topps had Bowman, Topps Traded and Stadium Club Dome, Donruss eventually came out with some Rated Rookies Set and Fleer had Final Update. The goal was to get everyone who made their debut in a set. Fast forward to today's monopoly, there is no incentive to do it. The wise decision is to release a full year of Wander in 2022.

[MiamiMarlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Archangel1775

Due to competition if you look at what each was releasing at the end of the year. In 1991 Upper Deck had Final Update, Topps had Bowman, Topps Traded and Stadium Club Dome, Donruss eventually came out with some Rated Rookies Set and Fleer had Final Update. The goal was to get everyone who made their debut in a set. Fast forward to today's monopoly, there is no incentive to do it. The wise decision is to release a full year of Wander in 2022.

Also, do we have any recent history of a player debuting as late as Wander AND still being in that year’s update?

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by MiamiMarlinsFan

Also, do we have any recent history of a player debuting as late as Wander AND still being in that year’s update?

If this is happening all the time then that's kind of the point. I'm not going all in on the RC logo, because it's applied in a way that maximizes profit instead of reflecting what actually happens on the field. No reason to go against tradition in this case since the RC logo is such a joke anyway.

[theshowandme]

Originally Posted by MiamiMarlinsFan

Also, do we have any recent history of a player debuting as late as Wander AND still being in that year’s update?

Trout

[Danderlion]

Originally Posted by Biohazarddfl

2022 Topps. Bowmans best and Topps now are gimmick cards.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Just gotta say I lol’d a few times in the thread some real gold in here folks.

I subscribe to the rookie logo and think it’s the way we all can universally recognize what is considered a rookie card. The bb is a cool card and if wander is as great as we think he will be it’ll all have plenty of value..

But you’re kidding yourself if you truly think it’ll be the recognized RC over the 22 flagship. Which is an awesome image by the way. Imagine how crazy demand for like the black border will be!

These guys are right. Flagship RC will win out over Bowman's Best every single time. Especially when one has the shield and the other doesn't. I have zero interest in the 2021 BB Wander non-shield card, although I am very happy for all of you that do! Collect what you like.

[MiamiMarlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

If this is happening all the time then that's kind of the point. I'm not going all in on the RC logo, because it's applied in a way that maximizes profit instead of reflecting what actually happens on the field. No reason to go against tradition in this case since the RC logo is such a joke anyway.

And we live in a hobby world that let’s you do just that. Buy up that BBest Wander, man. It’s a cool card. I’ll add one eventually because I like the image they used, but the prices are a little insane right now. Are you going to be buying singles of it or wax and hope to pull some yourself?

[MiamiMarlinsFan]

Originally Posted by theshowandme

Trout

That’s it? That’s the most recent? Mmkay.

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by MiamiMarlinsFan

And we live in a hobby world that let’s you do just that. Buy up that BBest Wander, man. It’s a cool card. I’ll add one eventually because I like the image they used, but the prices are a little insane right now. Are you going to be buying singles of it or wax and hope to pull some yourself?

I haven't bought any and I don't plan to. This isn't what I collect and I'm not a flipper. I just enjoy the argument of what makes a rookie card.

[rlriii13]

Originally Posted by MiamiMarlinsFan

Are you going to be buying singles of it or wax and hope to pull some yourself?

This is what gets me when folks start scoffing at the prices on eBay right now. Is $100 a lot for that base card? Yes, but how much would you spend on wax to get one?

[MiamiMarlinsFan]

Originally Posted by rlriii13

This is what gets me when folks start scoffing at the prices on eBay right now. Is $100 a lot for that base card? Yes, but how much would you spend on wax to get one?

Me? Nothing. I’m not a wax ripper, I’m a singles buyer. I’m mildly interested in this card and would pay $15 for the base version. If that means I’ll never get one, I’m okay with that.

While I get the point you are trying to make, anyone can clearly see that hype is what’s pushing the prices up on this card. Once 2022 Series 1 comes out, the prices for Wander’s ‘21 BBest should mellow a bit. If I’m wrong, and it’s “to the moon!” for this base card, I’ll live.

What about you?

[MiamiMarlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

I haven't bought any and I don't plan to. This isn't what I collect and I'm not a flipper. I just enjoy the argument of what makes a rookie card.

It’s been fun reading the debates.