The 1986-87 Michael Jordan Fleer is such a "rookie" card that...

[PensChronicles]

...the set features four other Chicago Bulls wearing 1985-86 uniforms and two players that DIDN'T EVEN PLAY FOR THE BULLS in 1984-85, Jordan's rookie season.



Imagine if Fleer had put a photo of Jordan from 1985-86 on his 1986-87 Fleer like they did with the rest of the Bulls in the set. How many in the hobby would consider it a rookie card?



Many 1986 rookie card fanboys say "WELL, THE 1984 STAR WASN'T PACK PULLED!"

Well, it depends on what your definition of a "pack" is and how it applies to a "rookie" card.

1984 Star was distributed in clear team bags. You knew EXACTLY what you were getting - just like if you purchased a 1989 Upper Deck baseball factory set, you were 100% certain to get a Ken Griffey Jr. rookie card. Or if I purchase a 1983 Topps baseball rack pack with Wade Boggs and Ryne Sandberg rookie cards clearly evident in the rack pack. The Griffey, Boggs and Sandberg were ALL considered rookie cards, but were hardly "pack pulled."

Many hobby dinosaurs like Dr. James Beckett also cite mass distribution as a way to slight the 1984 Star being Jordan's true rookie card. There were many, many issues of Sports Collector's Digest that had several dealers advertising the Star cards. At one point, SCD had 100,000+ subscribers - no small number of eyeballs saw that it was available. It was also distributed at NBA arenas and in some cases directly from Star - both channels are used today for card distribution.

Just this weekend you had hobby gatekeepers like Chris McGill, Josh Johnson & Cage Lawyer partnering up to try and dance on Geoff Wilson's grave this weekend over his $144,000 unrealized gain on a 1984-85 Michael Jordan Star #101...well, until Ken Goldin came on their show and verified that the card was paid for on September 3rd via wire transfer...notice how Chris and Josh say they are aware of what Cage posted while Chris and Josh were doing their live. They undoubtedly knew that Cage was going to post.

https://x.com/PensChronicles/status/1835352889096548503

Now why would Chris, Josh & Cage want to tamp down the enthusiam for the 1984 Michael Jordan Star #101 being sold for $244,000?

#1 - Chris and Josh HATE Geoff Wilson and will stop seemingly at nothing - well, short of just sending a simple text to Ken Goldin to verify a legitimate sale - to disparage Geoff. Geoff may not be for everyone, but he's done innumerable things for kids in the hobby and helps promote the hobby.

Josh doesn't even consider the 1984 Star a "real card" and said that he "could make" the photo-matched 1932 Babe Ruth called shot jersey that set a world record as the highest sale in sports memorabilia history.

https://x.com/PensChronicles/status/1834020761784221918

#2 - Cage OWNS A 1986-87 Fleer Jordan and not selling it at its peak was one of his biggest hobby regrets.

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...ave-had-a-few/

As of this morning when I checked, the 1984-85 Michael Jordan Star #101 sale has been restored to Card Ladder. There won't be an apology or any sign of remorse from Chris McGill, Josh Johnson or Cage Lawyer who has since deleted his Instagram reel also attempting to dance on Geoff's grave.

Chris McGill and Josh Johnson continue to think that IF YOU DON'T HOBBY LIKE US, YOU'RE LESSER.

***DISCLAIMER*** I DO NOT OWN A 1984 MICHAEL JORDAN STAR #101 or a 1986 MICHAEL JORDAN FLEER #57. I ALSO DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO MARKET MOVERS OR CARD LADDER AND HAVE NO AFFILIATION WITH GOLDIN AUCTIONS.

[KhalDrogo]

Sounds like a lot of female drama. Probably best to have this on IG.

[hermanotarjeta]

1983 and 1989 upper deck were both released initially and primarily in the randomized sealed wax/foil pack forms by legitimate fully licensed companies, now of which both have historical and long track records of this type of nationally distributed and released products.

Broder and minor league baseball sets, including those from star, were also advertised in scd.

Who cares what a bunch of teenage girls are trying to pump?

[PensChronicles]

Originally Posted by hermanotarjeta

1983 and 1989 upper deck were both released initially and primarily in the randomized sealed wax/foil pack forms by legitimate fully licensed companies, now of which both have historical and long track records of this type of nationally distributed and released products.

Broder and minor league baseball sets, including those from star, were also advertised in scd.

Who cares what a bunch of teenage girls are trying to pump?

The back of the 1984 Star Jordan #101 would like a word about the "fully licensed" part of your argument...



The Star company was so illegitimate that the "legitimate" Topps with a “historical and long track records of this type of nationally distributed and released products" made reprints of the Star brand in the mid-1990's...



The post has nothing to do with pumping. I don't care what the Star #101 sells for or what the Fleer #57 sells for.

The post has everything to do with being accurate when reporting what a card is/isn't and how much a card sells for superceding personal vendettas. Again, Chris and Josh HATE Geoff Wilson. They would rather damage Geoff's image and card rather than accurately report a sale.

[3124508 on COMC]

[hermanotarjeta]

Originally Posted by PensChronicles

The back of the 1984 Star Jordan #101 would like a word about the "fully licensed" part of your argument...



The Star company was so illegitimate that the "legitimate" Topps with a historical and long track records of this type of nationally distributed and released products" made reprints of the Star brand in the mid-1990's...



The post has nothing to do with pumping. I don't care what the Star #101 sells for or what the Fleer #57 sells for.

The post has everything to do with being accurate when reporting what a card is/isn't and how much a card sells for superceding personal vendettas. Again, Chris and Josh HATE Geoff Wilson. They would rather damage Geoff's image and card rather than accurately report a sale.

There is a YUGE difference between "barely licensed" and fully licensed". Fleer, Topps and Upper Deck all did it the right way - with nationally recognized products distributed in sealed, randomized pack form and decades of history. STAR basketball was an elementary school project that flopped - accept it.

Topps has issued cards that were promotional issues that were never released and placed them into latter released sets. Just look at 2024 finest baseball this year - they made reprint prototypes of their 1993 finest release using current players. Companies do this all the time to provide some variety to their now 40 plus release every year. It doesn't legitimize it as an actual product. Topps has done reprints of everything in the past, it doesn't mean a thing.

[PensChronicles]

Originally Posted by hermanotarjeta

There is a YUGE difference between "barely licensed" and fully licensed". Fleer, Topps and Upper Deck all did it the right way - with nationally recognized products distributed in sealed, randomized pack form and decades of history. STAR basketball was an elementary school project that flopped - accept it.

Topps has issued cards that were promotional issues that were never released and placed them into latter released sets. Just look at 2024 finest baseball this year - they made reprint prototypes of their 1993 finest release using current players. Companies do this all the time to provide some variety to their now 40 plus release every year. It doesn't legitimize it as an actual product. Topps has done reprints of everything in the past, it doesn't mean a thing.

Please tell me the difference - and I want you to be specific - between the license Star had to distribute NBA cards and the license that Fleer had.

Argue you all you want about manufacturing and distribution, but 1984 Star was the only officially licensed manufacturer of NBA trading cards that season - Michael Jordan’s first year in the NBA.

Topps hasn’t done reprints of any unlicensed products that I’m aware of unless it was of their own unlicensed products from the 70’s/80’s (Montana rookie as an example). When will they be releasing a reprint of 1991 Post Cereal?

[hermanotarjeta]

Originally Posted by PensChronicles

Please tell me the difference - and I want you to be specific - between the license Star had to distribute NBA cards and the license that Fleer had.

Argue you all you want about manufacturing and distribution, but 1984 Star was the only officially licensed manufacturer of NBA trading cards that season - Michael Jordan’s first year in the NBA.

Topps hasn’t done reprints of any unlicensed products that I’m aware of unless it was of their own unlicensed products from the 70’s/80’s (Montana rookie as an example). When will they be releasing a reprint of 1991 Post Cereal?

Star didn't release their cards in the way all licensed companies were expected and known to release them.

There's a reason why Star doesn't get any respect, just as how collector's edge brand gets no respect as a short-lived now defunct company who couldn't survive the early 90's boom. Furthermore, there is too much room for controversy and a lack of transparency in how they produced, allocated and released their products.

You clearly underestimate the importance of the randomization factor of pack pulled cards. You must really put a lot of value in panini instant and topps now cards.

[PensChronicles]

Originally Posted by hermanotarjeta

Star didn't release their cards in the way all licensed companies were expected and known to release them.

There's a reason why Star doesn't get any respect, just as how collector's edge brand gets no respect as a short-lived now defunct company who couldn't survive the early 90's boom. Furthermore, there is too much room for controversy and a lack of transparency in how they produced, allocated and released their products.

You clearly underestimate the importance of the randomization factor of pack pulled cards. You must really put a lot of value in panini instant and topps now cards.

With the license, Star could release the cards they produced however they saw fit

Star is certainly getting far, far more respect - and always has - than Collector’s Edge. There was a lack of demand for Star cards. They weren’t egregiously overprinted like 1986 Fleer and the demand for 1986 Fleer in 1986-87 was putrid.

Do you delineate between a pack-pulled 1989 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr. rookie card and one that was in a factory set where you were GUARANTEED a Ken Griffey Jr. rookie card?

Surely you discount the factory set version because it wasn’t from some randomization fantasyland of what does and doesn’t make a card a rookie card.

[hermanotarjeta]

Originally Posted by PensChronicles

With the license, Star could release the cards they produced however they saw fit

Star is certainly getting far, far more respect - and always has - than Collector’s Edge. There was a lack of demand for Star cards. They weren’t egregiously overprinted like 1986 Fleer and the demand for 1986 Fleer in 1986-87 was putrid.

Do you delineate between a pack-pulled 1989 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr. rookie card and one that was in a factory set where you were GUARANTEED a Ken Griffey Jr. rookie card?

Surely you discount the factory set version because it wasn’t from some randomization fantasyland of what does and doesn’t make a card a rookie card.

The factory set was made as an adjunct to the already released foil packs. Topps has been doing that for decades, it’s an acceptable form of card distribution after the randomized packs have been released. A better argument would be topps traded sets of the 80’s, but then again, that’s why they are labeled as xrc.

You must also think tiger woods real rookie was 1997-98 grand slam ventures and not his 2001 upper deck issues. Again, there are reasons why that gsv release has limited demand and the reasons are similar to the star Jordan.

[BambinoShuffle]

I don’t think it’s going as well as the op intended.

[hxcmilkshake]

Keep watching Instagram. They have cool cat videos too.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

[PensChronicles]

Originally Posted by hermanotarjeta

The factory set was made as an adjunct to the already released foil packs. Topps has been doing that for decades, it’s an acceptable form of card distribution after the randomized packs have been released. A better argument would be topps traded sets of the 80’s, but then again, that’s why they are labeled as xrc.

You must also think tiger woods real rookie was 1997-98 grand slam ventures and not his 2001 upper deck issues. Again, there are reasons why that gsv release has limited demand and the reasons are similar to the star Jordan.

No.

1997 Grand Slam Ventures = not licensed by the PGA tour
2001 Upper Deck = fully licensed by the PGA Tour

1984 Star = fully licensed by the NBA
1986 Fleer = fully licensed by the NBA

See the difference?

And there is no “right” or “wrong” way to distribute cards. Upper Deck has ePack which allows collectors to open packs digitally and obtained said rookie cards from said pack. Panini has Instant and Topps has their Now product.

Only the dinosaurs say those are illegitimate because “THAT’S NOT THE WAY IT WAS DONE WHEN I WENT TO THE C STORE TO BUY PACKS!”

Total nonsense. Rather than focus on the card, the dinosaurs can’t get passed the fact that it MUST BE DISTRIBUTED THE SAME WAY I GOT PACKS IN THE 1970’S!!!

[mc1]

If the card is so great why did it only become a sensation after PSA started grading them? Thats the real shame.

[hermanotarjeta]

Originally Posted by PensChronicles

No.

1997 Grand Slam Ventures = not licensed by the PGA tour
2001 Upper Deck = fully licensed by the PGA Tour

1984 Star = fully licensed by the NBA
1986 Fleer = fully licensed by the NBA

See the difference?

And there is no “right” or “wrong” way to distribute cards. Upper Deck has ePack which allows collectors to open packs digitally and obtained said rookie cards from said pack. Panini has Instant and Topps has their Now product.

Only the dinosaurs say those are illegitimate because “THAT’S NOT THE WAY IT WAS DONE WHEN I WENT TO THE C STORE TO BUY PACKS!”

Total nonsense. Rather than focus on the card, the dinosaurs can’t get passed the fact that it MUST BE DISTRIBUTED THE SAME WAY I GOT PACKS IN THE 1970’S!!!

Upper deck epacks are randomized cards, you can’t choose to purchase a Tom Holland pack-issued Spider-Man auto or a Goodwin champions Michael Jordan autograph.

Just as I suspected, you believe panini instant and topps now are on par with pack pulled cards.

If you value made to order cards so much, you will love topps project 2020 cards, they are right up your alley.

Let’s see how long the future of cards exists as a collectible when every single card produced is made to order - where does the challenge of pursuit, ie the entire essence of collecting, go?

[PensChronicles]

Originally Posted by BambinoShuffle

I don’t think it’s going as well as the op intended.

I knew I was walking into Jurassic Park.

[PensChronicles]

Originally Posted by hermanotarjeta

Upper deck epacks are randomized cards, you can’t choose to purchase a Tom Holland pack-issued Spider-Man auto or a Goodwin champions Michael Jordan autograph.

Just as I suspected, you believe panini instant and topps now are on par with pack pulled cards.

If you value made to order cards so much, you will love topps project 2020 cards, they are right up your alley.

Let’s see how long the future of cards exists as a collectible when every single card produced is made to order - where does the challenge of pursuit, ie the entire essence of collecting, go?

A 1989 Upper Deck factory set isn’t a randomized assortment of cards. Yet the Griffey Jr. inside the box is a rookie card…I know, I know…BUT THEY’RE PUT IN FOIL PACKS FIRST AND YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU GET!!!

Do you realize how silly it is to downplay the 1984 Star because the bags they were put in were clear and they came in team sets?

Topps issues team sets for all MLB teams with rookie cards inside. For example, I know there’s a Shohei Ohtani rookie in the package below. I also know there’s an Ohtani rookie card in the 2018 factory set. I know, I know…THE NUMBER ON THE BACK OF THE TEAM SET CARD IS DIFFERENT THAN THE ONES IN PACKS! THE FACTORY SET HAS A DIFFERENT PICTURE!

[hermanotarjeta]

Originally Posted by PensChronicles

A 1989 Upper Deck factory set isn’t a randomized assortment of cards. Yet the Griffey Jr. inside the box is a rookie card…I know, I know…BUT THEY’RE PUT IN FOIL PACKS FIRST AND YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU GET!!!

Do you realize how silly it is to downplay the 1984 Star because the bags they were put in were clear and they came in team sets?

Topps issues team sets for all MLB teams with rookie cards inside. For example, I know there’s a Shohei Ohtani rookie in the package below. I also know there’s an Ohtani rookie card in the 2018 factory set. I know, I know…THE NUMBER ON THE BACK OF THE TEAM SET CARD IS DIFFERENT THAN THE ONES IN PACKS! THE FACTORY SET HAS A DIFFERENT PICTURE!

I downplay the star Jordan because it was made to order during a time when it was already well established that the fairest way for collectors to have an equal chance at cards was to randomize them in blind packs. I can’t see how companies can give a fair shot at cards today, especially rarer case hits, parallels, autos and 1/1’s without randomizing them to packs. That randomization is the reason those cards are FAR more desirable. Not the made to order topps now and panini instant cards.

The Jordan is an xrc, a rookie card WITH an asterisk.

Why so angry, bro?

BTW, the ohtani in that team set is one of the cheapest rookies you can get of him on the market. No one really wants it.

[PensChronicles]

Originally Posted by hermanotarjeta

I downplay the star Jordan because it was made to order during a time when it was already well established that the fairest way for collectors to have an equal chance at cards was to randomize them in blind packs. I can’t see how companies can give a fair shot at cards today, especially rarer case hits, parallels, autos and 1/1’s without randomizing them to packs. That randomization is the reason those cards are FAR more desirable. Not the made to order topps now and panini instant cards.

The Jordan is an xrc, a rookie card WITH an asterisk.

Why so angry, bro?

BTW, the ohtani in that team set is one of the cheapest rookies you can get of him on the market. No one really wants it.

The 1984 Star was not “made to order” like Topps Now or Panini Instant where they print the number pre-ordered. Star printed the sets prior to selling them and they printed more sets than they could sell. The same thing happened with 1986 Fleer.

If the 1984 Star is an “extended rookie card” or “XRC”, what exactly is it extended from? Topps Traded/Update cards were extended from the base set. 1984 Star WAS THE BASE SET!

I’m not angry at all. I’ve answered your questions and you’ve avoided most of mine.

Finally, it doesn’t matter if the Ohtani team set rookie card is worth $0.01 or $1,000,000, the fact that you consider it a rookie card when you know EXACTLY WHAT YOU’RE GETTING - exactly like the 1984 Star - tells me all I need to know.

[hermanotarjeta]

Originally Posted by PensChronicles

The 1984 Star was not “made to order” like Topps Now or Panini Instant where they print the number pre-ordered. Star printed the sets prior to selling them and they printed more sets than they could sell. The same thing happened with 1986 Fleer.

If the 1984 Star is an “extended rookie card” or “XRC”, what exactly is it extended from? Topps Traded/Update cards were extended from the base set. 1984 Star WAS THE BASE SET!

I’m not angry at all. I’ve answered your questions and you’ve avoided most of mine.

Finally, it doesn’t matter if the Ohtani team set rookie card is worth $0.01 or $1,000,000, the fact that you consider it a rookie card when you know EXACTLY WHAT YOU’RE GETTING - exactly like the 1984 Star - tells me all I need to know.

Xrc has evolved to become just a general term used to describe cards that for the most part could be described as rookie cards but don’t necessarily meet all the criteria for mainstream release, ie pack pulled. I suppose that detail could be debatable, or we wouldn’t be discussing that right now.

It seems like you and I are debating about two different things. Topps now and panini instant can be rookie cards. Star Jordan could be a rookie card. I don’t see either of those cards as being more desirable due to how they were made available for sale and particularly the distribution of the star card made it very susceptible to corruption due to my randomization argument.

[phdbeckett]

What card is considered Babe Ruth's rookie card? Is it licensed, a xrc , pack pulled?

[hermanotarjeta]

Originally Posted by phdbeckett

What card is considered Babe Ruth's rookie card? Is it licensed, a xrc , pack pulled?

All cards must be viewed in the context of their contemporary history. Perhaps in the future direct to consumer rookie cards will be the mainstay.

[phdbeckett]

Originally Posted by hermanotarjeta

All cards must be viewed in the context of their contemporary history. Perhaps in the future direct to consumer rookie cards will be the mainstay.

I disagree. There were national distribution methods and materials in 1914. Baltimore News was not, but is now considered a rookie.

[Bcr]

Originally Posted by mc1

If the card is so great why did it only become a sensation after PSA started grading them? Thats the real shame.

Just a strange coincidence is all...

[hermanotarjeta]

Originally Posted by phdbeckett

I disagree. There were national distribution methods and materials in 1914. Baltimore News was not, but is now considered a rookie.

Who and how did they decide that? It’s interesting because it’s a huge piece of cardboard.