Prizm Base Print Run Estimates Through The Years

[massina cards]

Not sure if this has been attempted before but I wanted to estimate how the Prizm base print run has changed through the years, I added 2003 and 2007 TC as well. I did some math and here’s what I got. You can checkout my post from the other day if you want to see the methodology I used https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1428500



*TAKEAWAYS*
1. First of all, I’m NOT anti-base cards (sorta). Personally, I own a ton of early Prizm base. However, I’ve avoided Prizm from recent years. Based on the drastic increase in print run, I’d be hesitant to buy Tatum/Luka/Trae base and I wouldn’t touch Zion/Ja base with a ten foot pole.
2. These are estimates. Any project like this will be imperfect. However, I’m confident in my results. For most years, I’d be surprised if I’m off by more than 10-15%. And let’s say for example I am a little off.. maybe 2017 Prizm is actually 32,000 or maybe 2019 Prizm is actually 130,000. Those corrections still wouldn’t change the overall message of this graph.
3. 2019 surprised me the most, but it makes sense when you look at the numbers. For example, ~37,000 Zion base have already been graded. For comparison, only ~15,000 Trae base have been graded (both players have comparable value and Trae cards have been out longer). A print run of over 100,000 base is crazy but hey @paniniamerica, if I could print money, I’d do it too lol
4. Final thought: If you’re a collector, collect what you like. If you’re an investor, consider the inefficiencies in the market


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jw8]

Very interesting - that 3x jump from 2016 to 2017 seems to be the catalyst. Was the larger print run there entirely due to the hype of that Draft class?

The fact that 2012 has a print run that is 20x less than 2019 is bonkers. I should be hoarding all my 2012 base.

Would be great to see total graded pop (bgs and psa) versus each years PR.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[ThoseBackPages]

wow, i didnt realise that the numbers were this low overall

2019 Prizm is about half the number of 2011 Topps Update

[ThoseBackPages]

as far as investors.... worry about what the general public wants to buy, not what you think is "rarer"

[jw8]

Now that I think about it would larger print run directly correlate to better odds for 2019?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[jcardstore]

Originally Posted by jw8

Very interesting - that 3x jump from 2016 to 2017 seems to be the catalyst. Was the larger print run there entirely due to the hype of that Draft class?

The fact that 2012 has a print run that is 20x less than 2019 is bonkers. I should be hoarding all my 2012 base.

Would be great to see total graded pop (bgs and psa) versus each years PR.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Panini probably realized they could make 3x the money

[jw8]

Originally Posted by jcardstore

Panini probably realized they could make 3x the money

Assuming there was the demand

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Deadshot]

Do you think any of the big rookies were short printed? I know sometimes it feels like they are when you pull your 4th Daniel Gafford.

[massina cards]

Originally Posted by jw8

Very interesting - that 3x jump from 2016 to 2017 seems to be the catalyst. Was the larger print run there entirely due to the hype of that Draft class?

The fact that 2012 has a print run that is 20x less than 2019 is bonkers. I should be hoarding all my 2012 base.

Would be great to see total graded pop (bgs and psa) versus each years PR.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Right I found that interesting as well, but I think the jumps correlate with the increased popularity in Prizm. I think Prizm started to emerge as a premium product around 2016 and that’s also when silver popularity rose- then for the next year Panini prints 3x more for 2017-18. We see another big jump with 2019-20, but if you remember, the prior season was when Giannis prizm rookie first started blowing up and continuously shattering the ceiling for a Prizm rookie- then panini prints 3x more for 2019-20 Prizm. The next big rise in Prizm popularity was this past year. Maybe that means panini will crank the presses again or maybe they won’t push their luck because this draft class isn’t as hyped.. well soon find out


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[massina cards]

Originally Posted by Deadshot

Do you think any of the big rookies were short printed? I know sometimes it feels like they are when you pull your 4th Daniel Gafford.

I think that’s unlikely. The method that I used to calculate these numbers relied on the player with the most graded base cards- the top rookie- from each class. So if it is short print for the big rookies then that would mean the Daniel Gafford types have an even higher print run then my graph shows


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kobe101]

Originally Posted by Deadshot

Do you think any of the big rookies were short printed? I know sometimes it feels like they are when you pull your 4th Daniel Gafford.

I hear that!

I opened a ton of 2017 Prizm retail and have stacks of Frank Mason, Frank Jackson, Ivan Rabb ect and only a few Tatum, Fultz, Ball and Fox..... I didn’t pull many Bam or Mitchell’s either.

I do also have stacks of Josh Jackson so maybe I was just really lucky!

[RedMike]

Panini is going to f*ck prizm up.

[massina cards]

Originally Posted by ThoseBackPages

as far as investors.... worry about what the general public wants to buy, not what you think is "rarer"

I think there’s a correlation though. There’s A LOT of money in the card market and a lot of new investors. So I’d expect the market to become more efficient over time. Market cap is a valuable metric to look at.. when evaluating a company you don’t care as much about the value of an individual stock as much as the overall value of the company (market cap). For example, I’d estimate that the market cap on Tyler Herro Prizm base rookies is about 2x higher than the market cap on Kawhi Prizm base rookies. Yes, I understand that is an extreme example and the card market will never operate at the same level of efficiency as the stock market, but over time I’d expect it to take steps in that direction


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jw8]

Originally Posted by massina cards

I think there’s a correlation though. There’s A LOT of money in the card market and a lot of new investors. So I’d expect the market to become more efficient over time. Market cap is a valuable metric to look at.. when evaluating a company you don’t care as much about the value of an individual stock as much as the overall value of the company (market cap). For example, I’d estimate that the market cap on Tyler Herro Prizm base rookies is about 2x higher than the market cap on Kawhi Prizm base rookies. Yes, I understand that is an extreme example and the card market will never operate at the same level of efficiency as the stock market, but over time I’d expect it to take steps in that direction


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Market cap is one of the metrics that card ladder uses, it's helpful but it's not extrapolated across the entire print run only for the cards in their database.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Ericc5Bears]

Great work again massina! Bit of a random question but by chance do you have an estimate of the print run for the 2012 silvers? Most estimates I've heard are in the 150-300 range but I'd like the hear what you think.

[k13]

2012 prizm is so short printed in all of sports look at pops of Brady and Trout.

The story is the same for optic.
Huge jump in 18-20

[massina cards]

Originally Posted by Ericc5Bears

Great work again massina! Bit of a random question but by chance do you have an estimate of the print run for the 2012 silvers? Most estimates I've heard are in the 150-300 range but I'd like the hear what you think.

Thanks! I remember seeing an estimate a while ago at 180 for 2012 silver. I think that makes sense.. i might put it slightly higher, but I’d be surprised if it’s much more than 200


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GeechQuest]

Do not use Pop reports to try and determine PRs. It’s a fruitless endeavor.

Literally the ONLY thing you can glean from this info is people have graded 2019 vs 2018 more.

[massina cards]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

Do not use Pop reports to try and determine PRs. It’s a fruitless endeavor.

Literally the ONLY thing you can glean from this info is people have graded 2019 vs 2018 more.

I understand that it’s an imperfect method but I used the same method for every year so if I’m underestimating for one year there’s a good chance that I’m underestimating for other years as well. Also I think you can reasonably break it down into tiers: 2012-2016 Prizm is the first tier with an average PR of about 9,000. 2017-2018 Prizm is the second tier with an average PR of about 40,000 and 2019 is it’s own tier with a PR of about 120,000. Tier 2 has a PR about 4 times higher than Tier 1. And Tier 3 has a PR of about 3x higher than Tier 2. Obviously there’s a wide margin of error but I think the general proportions are a fair projection and that’s what’s most important


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by massina cards

I understand that it’s an imperfect method but I used the same method for every year so if I’m underestimating for one year there’s a good chance that I’m underestimating for other years as well. Also I think you can reasonably break it down into tiers: 2012-2016 Prizm is the first tier with an average PR of about 9,000. 2017-2018 Prizm is the second tier with an average PR of about 40,000 and 2019 is it’s own tier with a PR of about 120,000. Tier 2 has a PR about 4 times higher than Tier 1. And Tier 3 has a PR of about 3x higher than Tier 2. Obviously there’s a wide margin of error but I think the general proportions are a fair projection and that’s what’s most important


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are tons of variables recently though. Less busted but way more people grading.

Of course there are tiers and you’re not wrong.

The easiest way is to check the number of #’d parallels available to pull. Find out how many numbered parallels you’re pulling per box/case over a decent sample size. Extrapolate case run from there.

This is how everybody has figured it out in the past. You can get much more accurate estimates this way because you take the two biggest massive unknown variables our of the equation:

1) How much product has been busted
2) What percentage of cards that have been busted are getting graded

[PKIPP]

Would love to see something like this for Optic. Well done OP!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tyrith]

I didn't realize this in the other thread, but yeah, I think your methodology is very likely overstating the increase in the base print run. The % of the base cards that have been graded has very much shot up with time. With base cards in particular, they didn't used to be valued like they are now and likely were not handled with the same degree of care - particularly for Giannis, because he was drafted in the mid teens - so there are fewer gems out there. And I would imagine there are plenty of people more inclined to grade their own cards when they go pack to sleeve.

This isn't to say that the core trend identified here is wrong - I can't imagine it is. The methodology involved is set up in a way that if there's a miss in terms of degree, it's overstating the 2019 print run.

That said, I would generally steer away from buying non #'ed base and parallels these days, because even if it's not clear how much they've inflated the print run, there's little reason for all of the companies to not do so in the current environment.

[massina cards]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

There are tons of variables recently though. Less busted but way more people grading.

Of course there are tiers and you’re not wrong.

The easiest way is to check the number of #’d parallels available to pull. Find out how many numbered parallels you’re pulling per box/case over a decent sample size. Extrapolate case run from there.

This is how everybody has figured it out in the past. You can get much more accurate estimates this way because you take the two biggest massive unknown variables our of the equation:

1) How much product has been busted
2) What percentage of cards that have been busted are getting graded

Right, I figured someone would mention that haha. Definitely a more comprehensive (and time consuming) method. My method was tough for some years but for most I think it makes sense. As I’m sure you saw, this was how I determined 2018: I added the number of serial numbered Traes that have been graded from fast break red /125 to red /299 and all in between... 634/947 have been graded. 947/634=1.494. I multiplied 1.494 by the number of Lukas graded to determine the base PR. So what do you think is wrong with using that ratio? I think it makes sense because those Trae cards on average are comparable in value to Luka base and therefore most likely to be graded/regraded at the same rates. Under those circumstances it wouldn’t matter that many Lukas are still unopened in boxes. This assumes you want the total number of base in the product and not just the total number currently in circulation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[massina cards]

Originally Posted by tyrith

I didn't realize this in the other thread, but yeah, I think your methodology is very likely overstating the increase in the base print run. The % of the base cards that have been graded has very much shot up with time. With base cards in particular, they didn't used to be valued like they are now and likely were not handled with the same degree of care - particularly for Giannis, because he was drafted in the mid teens - so there are fewer gems out there. And I would imagine there are plenty of people more inclined to grade their own cards when they go pack to sleeve.

This isn't to say that the core trend identified here is wrong - I can't imagine it is. The methodology involved is set up in a way that if there's a miss in terms of degree, it's overstating the 2019 print run.

That said, I would generally steer away from buying non #'ed base and parallels these days, because even if it's not clear how much they've inflated the print run, there's little reason for all of the companies to not do so in the current environment.

Not sure I agree with you there. Giannis is the example you used- when he was drafted Prizm wasn’t important and neither was he so presumably he wasn’t handled with much care compared to today’s guys. However if you look at the pop report- 70% of Giannis sent to PSA have gemmed. Meanwhile 55% of Zion have gemmed. Giannis has the most valuable Prizm base and I guarantee there’s been more attempted regrades for 9s or lower that bring his percentage down even more


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GeechQuest]

Here is why you’re estimates of 32K vs 130K are off wildly.

From 2018 to 2019 no new numbered Prizm parallels were introduced. They all stayed the same.

The only new SKU introduced that you could pull base Prizms from was Fanatics. In saying that, we lost the ability to pull base cards from the FOTL SKU. I could check and figure out the difference in base between the SKUs, but the difference isn’t 100K cards per player. There’s actually probably more in FOTL than the Fanatics boxes honestly just because the Fanatics boxes were limited and you pull 3x the amount of cards from FOTL. The Fanatics run would have to be 3x the FOTL run and it’s not (2018 FOTL had ~6300 boxes produced, 2019 Fanatics isn’t 20K and that’s a break even base run number)

We know we’re pulling the same number of parallels per Hobby Box and FB Box, and those #’d cards didn’t change so production didn’t change.

That leaves us retail. The #’d cards in retail also didn’t change.

In short, to have 100,000 more base cards per player be produced the odds of pulling the #’d parallels from retail would have had to go up by an ASTRONOMICAL factor (and they may have, I’ve never cared to check) which is unlikely.

All available pull rates for #’d parallels that we could back engineer to find case odds point to the PRs from 2018 to 2019 being very similar. All that the data on grading would tell us is just how many people are grading these cards now vs years past.

Just check the odds of pulling #’d cards from retail and you’ll have a good starting point. The 2018 data is concrete already.