Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: A Discussion: Patch vs. Auto

  1. #1

    A Discussion: Patch vs. Auto

    Saw this come up somewhere in another thread on SCF and it got me thinking: What is better? An auto of your favorite player or a sweet patch of the same guy? I'll start off with my answer...

    I think that nothing compares to an autograph of your idol. There's just nothing like the first time you get an that auto of THE ballplayer you adore. However, it seems that once you have a couple in your collection, patches seem to be cooler than another auto. Why? It's not because autos aren't as special (to me at least) anymore, I still love them. I think it is because autos don't really change. That differs from patches when you can hit those sick patches with parts of the team logo in them or letter patches from their actual jersey. So, what's cooler? I can't put one over the other. Nothing beats the autograph, but since you can always search for a cooler patch, patches stay in the conversation

    Anybody else have thoughts on the topic?
    Supercollecting the Twins and Chris Herrmann
    Also collecting Justin Morneau, Michael Cuddyer, sets, Wild, North Stars
    Hidden Content
    Hidden Content
    Hidden Content

  2. #2
    I would choose autographs first. But, mostly because I have too many questions for relic cards. There is a lot less proof that they are legit. They do look pretty cool, but for the money, I would rather have an auto or even a sweet looking low numbered insert or something.
    I collect: Marbury, Jordan, Kobe, AI, Durant, Westbrook
    Chicago Cubs, Randy Moss, Minnesota Vikings
    MY SITE:Hidden Content
    Hidden Content

  3. #3

    Clemson2012's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Card Cash
    Transferred Feedback

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta

    I rather have an auto of j Upton but a patch/auto would be even sweeter. If I had to choose one or other though I believe I would go with auto. Just personal preference no other reason really.
    I am an avid Atlanta Braves fan. I don't collect cards anymore but do buy a pack here and there. I just had a son that I hope to get into collecting when he gets a little older. I constantly keep up with Braves news.
    Hidden Content

  4. #4
    An autograph will be more valuable in the long run. And unlike a patch, the authenticity of a player's signature can be confirmed. With a patch, you're just taking somebody's word for it.
    Collecting pre-war, vintage and modern baseball cards.
    Currently working on the T206 set, 1975 Topps, master collections of Roberto Clemente and Robin Yount.

  5. #5
    Agree with Lambeau, I'd bet that 90% of these "game used" relics are crap. What do they just have an infinite amount of jerseys and bats to cut up? Give me a break...I'd take an auto in a heart beat.
    Last edited by baseballboy2; 02-26-2013 at 05:38 PM.

  6. #6
    Probably would depend on the player and the size and type of the patch but the vast majority of the time you would go with the autograph
    Baseball Trade Page: Hidden Content
    4 Sport Trade Bucket: Hidden Content

  7. #7
    I'm assuming you probably got the idea from something I posted recently and like before I'm for patches over autos.
    There's nothing like receiving a beautiful patch card of your favorite player that he (could, hopefully, possibly, improbably) wore in a game than just his signature.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts