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

[k13]

Originally Posted by MoreToppsPlease

I agree that the MLB/MLBPA gets to define what a rookie is simply because manufacturers…and especially flippers…will always try to abuse the definition to whatever will bring them the most profit.

…and here we are.

No one does anything like that in other sports.
Mlb knows nothing about rookie cards anyway.

The criteria is simple just some people don't like it when it doesn't fit their narrative.

[MiamiMarlinsFan]

Originally Posted by imbluestreak23

90%+ is so gullible they will accept a 2nd year MLB season card that features some goofy logo as a RC?

I would like to disassociate myself from the 90% that would qualify as "dumb" in our community. What a bunch of gullible kiddos they are.

You’re so cool.

[unclebuggy]

Originally Posted by Timsterino

Correct. That’s how it works. I will pick up the second year cards with the RC logo also. The less people that pick up the Bowman’s Best the better for me. I don’t want to pay crazy prices.

Lol. Goofy. There have been many thousands of other Topps produced cards that no one, not even Beckett who is on the verge of losing all credibility, views as rookie cards. That is not how it works at all...

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[roush16racing]

33% of poll respondents are strange.

[unclebuggy]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

That is correct. By the agreement MLBPA and Topps agreed on, 2021 Bowman's Best is Wander's rookie card.

Your image only indicates that Topps screwed up, not that it is a rookie card at all.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[unclebuggy]

Originally Posted by MoreToppsPlease

The only people who still think think these cards and Verlander’s 2005 issues are rookie cards are the people who were socialized to think they were rookies decades ago over a period of approximately a dozen years so that people would buy into the entirely new idea of prospecting and to buy in to Bowman.

Fewer and fewer people hold the belief they’re rookies every year and that number will continue to decline - it’s really time to move on.

Everyone other than you seems to agree 2005 is the rookie card for Verlander. I've literally never even seen the argument made, as it's silly on its face. 2006 was the year the rules changed and things were still getting sorted out. The 2005 Verlander sells for a lot more because everyone agrees it is the actual rookie card.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[unclebuggy]

Originally Posted by MoreToppsPlease

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.

Price is indicative of which cards collector's belive is actually the rookie card.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[unclebuggy]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

The only way this is going to affect my personal collection is Cristian Hernandez. If he comes through, one day I'll have to have a PSA 10 2021 Bowman's Best #3. Maybe a blue refractor /150 if he's an all-time great.

An interesting piece from Beckett's article is that they specifically state that parallels are not rookies. So even if the base was somehow a rookie, thr blue wouldn't be according to them... while most will consider niether to be.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[unclebuggy]

Beckett's statement also specifically states that parallels aren't rookie cards. If this isn't proof that no one cares what Beckett thinks anymore...

Their article also indicates they play to list 2023 Wander cards as (RC) with the parentheses. So that is where we are at. Even Beckett will list them as RC, just with parentheses.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[jhssketchcards]

Let’s use Juan Soto as an example…
It’s accepted that 2018 Topps Update and Topps Chrome Update are his two most collected RCs as well as parallels of those. He also has RC in Heritage HN, Archives, and some more sets from 2018. But he also has 1st Bowman Chrome and Bowman Prospects from 2016.
For those saying 2021 Bowman’s Best is Wanders RC, do you believe 2016 Bowman Chrome is Soto’s RC? If you say yes, then Wanders true RC is 2019 1st Bowman Prospects Paper/Chrome since that set came out first. 2021 Bowman’s Best would be a 2nd year card according to this logic that 2022 is not his true RC.
This reminds me of the Non-sports thread arguing about baby Yoda/Grogu and his “rookie cards” simply as a way to maximize profit. (No other characters were debated to the degree as he was in relation to a RC).
I do think Topps screwed this up and Franco should have been in Update 2021, but like the vast majority I anticipate busting 2022 S1 and pulling his RCs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AnthonyT]

Is this really a debate? Franco has had a Bowman card since 2019, why is it a surprise he is in 2021? Other than the 2020 Topps Update insert card, he has not had any Topps issue. In simpler times when there was one set for the year, the first card released was his rookie card. Dale Murphy was on a Rookie quad in 1977 and 1978, but no one is trying to pass off the 78 card as his rookie. It's a second year card. But now we have minor league, pre-major, 1st bowman, #1 prospect, etc, etc, all before they pick up a bat in the majors. Its messier. But Topps, as I see it, remains the card as the first MLB card when it shows the RC logo. So i am going to side on that when it is released in 2022. Bowman 2021 is just a 4th year card for Franco.

[cardsin47]

Originally Posted by jhssketchcards

I do think Topps screwed this up and Franco should have been in Update 2021, but like the vast majority I anticipate busting 2022 S1 and pulling his RCs.

Not for their stockholders— or is it Fanatics stockholders

[lauriontj]

2022 Series 1 will be thee RC to own. People spending $100’s on the Bowmans Best don’t understand this hobby.

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by unclebuggy

Beckett's statement also specifically states that parallels aren't rookie cards. If this isn't proof that no one cares what Beckett thinks anymore...

Their article also indicates they play to list 2023 Wander cards as (RC) with the parentheses. So that is where we are at. Even Beckett will list them as RC, just with parentheses.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

Parallels have never been true rookie cards, but they are parallels OF rookie cards, which is why they're so valuable. Rookie cards are only base cards, not inserts or parallels. Otherwise it would be impossible to complete a rookie card set. Can you imagine trying to buy every Tatis card from 2019 that had that little RC on the front? Does anyone think the card below is a rookie card?

[cardsin47]

Originally Posted by lauriontj

2022 Series 1 will be thee RC to own. People spending $100’s on the Bowmans Best don’t understand this hobby.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by jhssketchcards

Let’s use Juan Soto as an example…
It’s accepted that 2018 Topps Update and Topps Chrome Update are his two most collected RCs as well as parallels of those. He also has RC in Heritage HN, Archives, and some more sets from 2018. But he also has 1st Bowman Chrome and Bowman Prospects from 2016.
For those saying 2021 Bowman’s Best is Wanders RC, do you believe 2016 Bowman Chrome is Soto’s RC? If you say yes, then Wanders true RC is 2019 1st Bowman Prospects Paper/Chrome since that set came out first. 2021 Bowman’s Best would be a 2nd year card according to this logic that 2022 is not his true RC.
This reminds me of the Non-sports thread arguing about baby Yoda/Grogu and his “rookie cards” simply as a way to maximize profit. (No other characters were debated to the degree as he was in relation to a RC).
I do think Topps screwed this up and Franco should have been in Update 2021, but like the vast majority I anticipate busting 2022 S1 and pulling his RCs.

Originally Posted by AnthonyT

Is this really a debate? Franco has had a Bowman card since 2019, why is it a surprise he is in 2021? Other than the 2020 Topps Update insert card, he has not had any Topps issue. In simpler times when there was one set for the year, the first card released was his rookie card. Dale Murphy was on a Rookie quad in 1977 and 1978, but no one is trying to pass off the 78 card as his rookie. It's a second year card. But now we have minor league, pre-major, 1st bowman, #1 prospect, etc, etc, all before they pick up a bat in the majors. Its messier. But Topps, as I see it, remains the card as the first MLB card when it shows the RC logo. So i am going to side on that when it is released in 2022. Bowman 2021 is just a 4th year card for Franco.

Normally yes, but all those pre-RC cards released for Soto and Wander were either part of prospect-only sets like Bowman Draft, or were part of insert sets like Bowman Chrome Prospects. Those are the rules Topps is supposed to follow that allow them to make cards for prospects, because as soon as a player has a base card in a regular MLB set, that's his rookie year. Topps broke the rules and made Wander and others part of the regular base set in 2021 BBest. That's the controversy.

[Shankweather]

Here is Fernando Tatis's rookie card registry at PSA. No parallels, no inserts, only base cards. Auto cards like Dynasty are RCs as long as they're part of the base /10 set and not /5 or /1. If this list was expanded to include every card with an "RC" on the front, it would be impossible and meaningless. This is one reason I try to defend the definition of a rookie card, because stuff like this matters to people.

https://www.psacard.com/psasetregist...position/19388

[unclebuggy]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

Parallels have never been true rookie cards, but they are parallels OF rookie cards, which is why they're so valuable. Rookie cards are only base cards, not inserts or parallels. Otherwise it would be impossible to complete a rookie card set. Can you imagine trying to buy every Tatis card from 2019 that had that little RC on the front? Does anyone think the card below is a rookie card?

You're saying that a basic refractor RC isn't a rookie. Of the hundreds or even thousands of other collectors I've talked too, I've never heard that one before. But I have heard all of them say the opposite.

Not even talking about variant cards like the bat down Acuna, which everyone also considers a rookie card. Just parallels.

I guess it's true that there inst anything that everyone agrees on. But 99.9 percent is good enough.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

[imbluestreak23]

Originally Posted by MiamiMarlinsFan

You’re so cool.

I know.

I know.

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by unclebuggy

You're saying that a basic refractor RC isn't a rookie. Of the hundreds or even thousands of other collectors I've talked too, I've never heard that one before. But I have heard all of them say the opposite.

Not even talking about variant cards like the bat down Acuna, which everyone also considers a rookie card. Just parallels.

I guess it's true that there inst anything that everyone agrees on. But 99.9 percent is good enough.

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk

Did you take a look at the PSA rookie set list I posted for Tatis? Do you understand where I'm coming from there?

[Danderlion]

Originally Posted by lauriontj

2022 Series 1 will be thee RC to own. People spending $100’s on the Bowmans Best don’t understand this hobby.

Originally Posted by Bcr

No need to try and reason with the minority. Nothing you say or do will make the 10% change their mind. The hobby will soon forget about them and we can talk about how great our actual rookie cards are.

Originally Posted by Gradek

Except for the last 15 years, Topps, MLB, and the MLBPA set a standard for rookies that includes the RC icon and is endorsed by both MLB and MLBPA (none of which this wander has). The fact is, this will not be considered wanders rookie card by 90%+ of the hobby come early February due to the lack of the RC icon.

Originally Posted by Banks8181

Some of you people are stuck in the past. The people have spoken! Bring on the logo! 😂

Originally Posted by Gradek

Once S1 comes out, this will be forgotten by everyone who didn’t overpay/invest heavily in BB.

All of this. Flagship

[Technochocolate]

I don't get why this is so difficult to grasp. Wander's 2022 cards will be superior in every single way (design, value, collectability, desirability). The community will want his '22 cards more than his '21 cards, they're better, period.

But none of them will technically be his RC. The Bowman's Best will be the RC. And that's ok, because that won't impact the the desirability of the '22s.

[ThoseBackPages]

- Legitimate Set Release.
- Issued via Pack and/or Factory Set.
- 1st time inclusion in a Base Set that contains veterans.
- Numbered normally within that Base Set.

RC

[ThoseBackPages]

Originally Posted by Technochocolate

I don't get why this is so difficult to grasp. Wander's 2022 cards will be superior in every single way (design, value, collectability, desirability). The community will want his '22 cards more than his '21 cards, they're better, period.

But none of them will technically be his RC. The Bowman's Best will be the RC. And that's ok, because that won't impact the the desirability of the '22s.

Correct, just like Mantle

[Shankweather]

Originally Posted by Technochocolate

I don't get why this is so difficult to grasp. Wander's 2022 cards will be superior in every single way (design, value, collectability, desirability). The community will want his '22 cards more than his '21 cards, they're better, period.

But none of them will technically be his RC. The Bowman's Best will be the RC. And that's ok, because that won't impact the the desirability of the '22s.