Beckett: Stars, Semi-Stars, Commons - How About Hall of Famer's?

[Savard18]

Another reason (for me) to bash Beckett.

I have a Beckett print version, and Beckett's unlisted card designation(s) frustrate me. I'm sure you're all aware unlisted cards are designated in three different categories; common, semi-stars or stars, and to me this is terribly frustrating and to some extent disrespectful, or perhaps lazy.. Obviously this is a subjective idea but it really bugs me that Hall of Famers are merely designated "stars", and what does "star" even mean? for example according to Beckett a 1990-91 OPC Brian Leetch or Mark Messier holds the same value as a Wendell Clark or Vincent Damphousse and to me that is ridiculous because IMO, as both a hockey fan and hockey card collector placing Brian Leetch on par with Gary Suter undermines Hall of Famers, and the Hall of Fame in general. At the very least Beckett could and should have a "Hall of Fame" designation, and place a premium value on Hall of Fame players.. Not only that but the concept of "star", "semi-star" and "common" are extremely subjective terms unlike "Hall of Fame" which is as objective as you can get.

Now obviously Beckett is profoundly flawed to begin with however many still use Beckett to place value on their cards, and most of the time Beckett is used to weigh value in trades, however the notion that an unlisted Mark Messier is just as valuable as a Craig Janney from the same set is ridiculous... And yes, I'm aware a lot of this applies to base cards that hold little value to begin with but none of that changes the fact a Hall of Famer is in the Hall of Fame for a reason, hence their cards should at the very least reflect that and I have no idea why after all these years since Beckett stopped listing HOF'ers they didn't think that if they weren't going to list HOF'ers that they should at the very least create a sub-category for them..

Not only that but what is the difference between a "star" and "semi-star"?? Beckett's recommendation? lol... Yea, I'm aware that Beckett has a list that gives examples of "stars" and "semi-stars" however whats a "star" or "semi-star" to me may not be one to you.

[Maggot]

There are even more egregious errors in the unlisted stars section than the ones you pointed out.

Drew Stafford, Cody Hodgson, Cory Schneider
= same value as
Guy Lafleur, Nick Lidstrom, Grant Fuhr

Or how about this one. Would you rather have 17-18 Upper Deck Canvas Checklist C90 Price/Bobrov ($8) or would you rather have 2017-18 SPx Extravagent Materials Brett Hull Jsy ($8)?
$25/card product, HOF jersey, card sells for $8 when on sale... or a $.25 insert... even trade?

Sadly, the good book is worthless. The values are not based on any actual sales data, except for rare exceptions. Values are posted for cards at the time of a set's release based on some ridiculous formula, and are never updated.

I respect people's desire to trade by BV, but as a non-subscriber I always request the other party do all the BV lookups.

[baystate123]

I haven't looked in one in over 10 years.

[30ranfordfan]

I have not looked at those lists in (I'm guessing) about two decades. They don't mean a whole lot to me.

You used Messier as an example. When you consider how incredible his career was (compared to virtually anyone who ever played..... Messier, IMO, is top 10 player of all time) his cards sell for nothing.

Everyone attached to the dynasty-era Oilers is undervalued, except Gretzky (I think).

As for the semi-star, star, common...... and lack of a HOF designation.... I think you're worrying about it too much.

To start with, there are plenty of non-HOFers that outsell (because they're far more popular) that HOFers. You and I would both agree that Wendell Clark & Mark Messier are not in the same league when you're talking about great careers. Show me the person who claims Clark was ever a comparable to Messier, and I'll be able to point to a fool.

This is not an exact science (I realize) but take into consideration these two recent eBay sales:

https://www.ebay.ca/itm/15-16-UD-THE...MAAOSwc6ZcFcSW

https://www.ebay.ca/itm/2014-15-Uppe...YAAOSw~E9cZ1Wv

Two very nice cards, from a high end set. Different years, but same serial #ing (/35), same type of card. Why does Clark go for almost 30% more than Messier? It has NOTHING to do with stats, or the unquantifiable "greatness" of the two players... it's got nothing to do with the HOF. It has to do with popularity.

Bob Probert wasn't even as good at hockey as Clark was.... and his stuff does really well.


There's plenty of HOFers (think Clark Gillies, Dick Duff, Bernie Federko as three easy examples) who were fine players, but never once screamed "elite". Not in the class of Gretzky or Howe... but they're not even in the class of Sundin, or Lindros, Adam Oates. I'd be surprised if you can find a single example of a set (I'm thinking autos or game used) that contains both Clark Gillies & Wendel Clark.... and the WC doesn't outsell that CG.



Think of guys like Mike Gartner, Rod Langway, Larry Murphy, Ron Francis, and Michel Goulet. Great players, nobody cares about their stuff. Larry Robinson (IMO) is probably the 3rd greatest defenceman who ever lived. His stuff sells for dirt cheap when you consider his accomplishments.


The whole point of the common, semi-star, star is to tier the unlisted players. Then they only have to list Superstars, and rookies of note.

..... so for Brian Leetch vs Gary Suter: I'd be surprised that Suter isn't a semi-star, and Leetch isn't a star... but what do I know? I would point out if you're looking at the price guide aspect of it.... even if those two fall into the same category, it doesn't mean they are equal in value. BVs are not, and have never been, hard values. They're a range. If I said these "star players" for $1 - $2: Perhaps Suter goes for a buck everwhere outside of Calgary..... and Leetch is a $2 card everywhere. That sort of thing.


Also don't forget about regional bias. I would expect a Patrick Marleau RC (as an example) to be priced at the HI column value from Beckett... or even higher... at a card show in Ontario. I'd expect it to be priced at the Beckett LO column, and have a 50% off sticker, at a card show Alberta.

[Savard18]

There are even more egregious errors in the unlisted stars section than the ones you pointed out.

Drew Stafford, Cody Hodgson, Cory Schneider
= same value as
Guy Lafleur, Nick Lidstrom, Grant Fuhr

Or how about this one. Would you rather have 17-18 Upper Deck Canvas Checklist C90 Price/Bobrov ($8) or would you rather have 2017-18 SPx Extravagent Materials Brett Hull Jsy ($8)?
$25/card product, HOF jersey, card sells for $8 when on sale... or a $.25 insert... even trade?

Sadly, the good book is worthless. The values are not based on any actual sales data, except for rare exceptions. Values are posted for cards at the time of a set's release based on some ridiculous formula, and are never updated.

I respect people's desire to trade by BV, but as a non-subscriber I always request the other party do all the BV lookups.

I don't know how Beckett comes up with "prices/value" presently but they used to use a survey model and Beckett encouraged readers to partake in their survey by giving away free Beckett subscriptions at random to those that participated (which was a flawed model to begin with)... Obviously Beckett no longer uses that model because ebay is that model and could be considered or looked at as a survay.. Ebay will will tell you exactly what the market value for a card is.. If Beckett does have a current model I suspect they're polling card shop owners and asking them what they "price cards at" vs. what they actually sell for, and "high book" is what card shop owners/dealers price the cards at and "low book" is what they sell for in a retail environment - even then that theory is shaky at best considering Beckett only gets the value of "in demand" er desirable cards correct while completely missing the nail on others. For example Beckett does get the value of Young Guns right, YG's do sell for between low and high Beckett for listed players but Beckett completely misses the mark on others from the same set like UD Portraits.. For example my UD Portraits Ovechkin is labeled as an SP and books for $8-$20 however you can buy them on ebay all day for $2.... At the same time tho, when it comes to ebay shipping has to be factored as well, and when you factor that I believe low Beckett is somewhat accurate.

Of course that is only one issue with Beckett, that doesn't change the fact they lump "stars" and Hall of Famers into one category which is just criminal... I get it - Beckett doesn't have the room to list every HOF'er in every set, but they should at least have a HOF'er category or state that HOF'ers are 2x the value of "stars"...

To answer your question - I would take a Brett Hull jersey any day of the week over a Price canvas, checklist or otherwise (outside of his YG of course)... And IMO, this is a prefect example of Beckett screwing with the hobby.. In a situation like this there is no way any collector would pay what Beckett reports for the Price canvas, at the same time a collector would never pay more than what Beckett reports for a Hull jersey.. Collectors will invoke Beckett when it benefits them, and to be honest with you that really affects the true value of a card.. IMO, Beckett valuing a Hull jersey at 8 is holding that cards value back... I mean if I slapped a 8 dollar tag on that Hull jersey many would think I'm out of my mind ONLY because Beckett values it at 8, but say Beckett priced it at $20 I would probably get plenty of interest at $8, so IMO Beckett is manipulating the hobby with their "prices"..

IMO, Beckett overvalues modern cards and criminally undervalues older cards... I mean it's crazy that few recent Hall of Famers have rookie cards that book for more than 2 bucks.. Bure, Selanne, Niedermayer, Brodeur, Pronger, Belfour, Lindros, Fedorov etc.. I mean I could get their "best" rookies combined as a lot for $5, and to me that is just criminal.... Of course I'm aware that these cards were issued in an era of mass production, but even factoring in mass production these cards are worth more than pocket change... A Scott Niedermayer RC is worth more than an UD Canvas Anthony Duclair, yet Beckett disagrees..

Heck, according to Beckett Joey Kocur, Glenn Healy and Martin Gelinas 1990-91 Upper Deck RC's ($1.00) are worth more than Hall of Famer's Scott Niedermayer and Rob Blake RC's (.75 cents), SMH.. It doesn't make any sense.

Obviously I'm not talking about very valuable cards, but these examples demonstrate that Beckett is full of crap..

[30ranfordfan]

I don't know how Beckett comes up with "prices/value" presently but they used to use a survey model and Beckett encouraged readers to partake in their survey by giving away free Beckett subscriptions at random to those that participated (which was a flawed model to begin with)... Obviously Beckett no longer uses that model because ebay is that model and could be considered or looked at as a survay.. Ebay will will tell you exactly what the market value for a card is.. If Beckett does have a current model I suspect they're polling card shop owners and asking them what they "price cards at" vs. what they actually sell for, and "high book" is what card shop owners/dealers price the cards at and "low book" is what they sell for in a retail environment - even then that theory is shaky at best considering Beckett only gets the value of "in demand" er desirable cards correct while completely missing the nail on others. For example Beckett does get the value of Young Guns right, YG's do sell for between low and high Beckett for listed players but Beckett completely misses the mark on others from the same set like UD Portraits.. For example my UD Portraits Ovechkin is labeled as an SP and books for $8-$20 however you can buy them on ebay all day for $2.... At the same time tho, when it comes to ebay shipping has to be factored as well, and when you factor that I believe low Beckett is somewhat accurate.

Of course that is only one issue with Beckett, that doesn't change the fact they lump "stars" and Hall of Famers into one category which is just criminal... I get it - Beckett doesn't have the room to list every HOF'er in every set, but they should at least have a HOF'er category or state that HOF'ers are 2x the value of "stars"...

To answer your question - I would take a Brett Hull jersey any day of the week over a Price canvas, checklist or otherwise (outside of his YG of course)... And IMO, this is a prefect example of Beckett screwing with the hobby.. In a situation like this there is no way any collector would pay what Beckett reports for the Price canvas, at the same time a collector would never pay more than what Beckett reports for a Hull jersey.. Collectors will invoke Beckett when it benefits them, and to be honest with you that really affects the true value of a card.. IMO, Beckett valuing a Hull jersey at 8 is holding that cards value back... I mean if I slapped a 8 dollar tag on that Hull jersey many would think I'm out of my mind ONLY because Beckett values it at 8, but say Beckett priced it at $20 I would probably get plenty of interest at $8, so IMO Beckett is manipulating the hobby with their "prices"..

IMO, Beckett overvalues modern cards and criminally undervalues older cards... I mean it's crazy that few recent Hall of Famers have rookie cards that book for more than 2 bucks.. Bure, Selanne, Niedermayer, Brodeur, Pronger, Belfour, Lindros, Fedorov etc.. I mean I could get their "best" rookies combined as a lot for $5, and to me that is just criminal.... Of course I'm aware that these cards were issued in an era of mass production, but even factoring in mass production these cards are worth more than pocket change... A Scott Niedermayer RC is worth more than an UD Canvas Anthony Duclair, yet Beckett disagrees..

Heck, according to Beckett Joey Kocur, Glenn Healy and Martin Gelinas 1990-91 Upper Deck RC's ($1.00) are worth more than Hall of Famer's Scott Niedermayer and Rob Blake RC's (.75 cents), SMH.. It doesn't make any sense.

Obviously I'm not talking about very valuable cards, but these examples demonstrate that Beckett is full of crap..

I've been convinced for many years that Beckett, today, just uses a formula. Player, set, production quantity, auto (sticker or not?), game used.... it all goes into blender, and they pop out a value range.

Scott Niedermayer, let's use him as an example. I'm not sure what you think it should be worth... but I'd be shocked if you can find a single person willing to pay $3 for his RC. There are 35 copies available on sportlots right now.... not a single one has an asking price higher than 91 cents. 17 of them have an asking price of 18 cents (which is the lowest asking price you'll find on the site). If I go back there next month, I'll be VERY surprised if there are less than 35 copies available.

I can hop on eBay right now and buy a PSA 10 of the card for $15 USD.

Remember... hockey cards only have value because they sell like a commodity. They're just cardboard pictures of hockey men. The only way that Niedermayer is going to sell for more than a couple of bucks, is if the demand rises sharply. I can assure that unless Scott Niedermayer himself decides to spend his money buying up copies of his 90-91 UD Rookie Card.... and just hording every single copy he can get his hands on.... it's never going to happen. The 10s of thousands of copies of that card that were printed: Anyone who wants a copy has one, and there is ample supply to ensure that the 100 (or so) people in 2019 that don't own one, and now want to, will be able to get it for next-to-nothing.

The idea that they should have a HOF category, with a higher multiplier vs stars..... I just don't see why. If the reality is that Scott Niedermayer and Theo Fleury sell for about the same.... why should Beckett be reporting differently ?

Going back to your Hull jersey example..... If the card sells for $4 - $8 (which is probably realistic, Hull is another very under appreciated Super Star) why should Beckett price it at $10 - $20 (you used $20 in your example....I'm just turning that into a range). Truth is, it probably sells for $4 - $8.

To some degree, you're probably right. If Beckett would list it at $10 - $20, and you were trying to sell it for $8.... you might get some interest, because someone might come along and think they're getting a great deal, and they can flip it for a profit (which wouldn't happen). Is the point of their price guide not to report what cards actually sell for?? Are they manipulating the hobby with their prices.... or are they just reporting on it?

[Savard18]

I have not looked at those lists in (I'm guessing) about two decades. They don't mean a whole lot to me.

You used Messier as an example. When you consider how incredible his career was (compared to virtually anyone who ever played..... Messier, IMO, is top 10 player of all time) his cards sell for nothing.

Everyone attached to the dynasty-era Oilers is undervalued, except Gretzky (I think).

As for the semi-star, star, common...... and lack of a HOF designation.... I think you're worrying about it too much.

To start with, there are plenty of non-HOFers that outsell (because they're far more popular) that HOFers. You and I would both agree that Wendell Clark & Mark Messier are not in the same league when you're talking about great careers. Show me the person who claims Clark was ever a comparable to Messier, and I'll be able to point to a fool.

This is not an exact science (I realize) but take into consideration these two recent eBay sales:

https://www.ebay.ca/itm/15-16-UD-THE-CUP-MARK-MESSIER-SCRIPTED-STICKS-AUTO-35/202574745621?hash=item2f2a655015:g:x~MAAOSwc6ZcFcS W

https://www.ebay.ca/itm/2014-15-Upper-Deck-The-Cup-Scripted-Sticks-Wendel-Clark-Auto-23-35-Maple-Leafs/123648098836?hash=item1cca004214:g:SoYAAOSw~E9cZ1W v

Two very nice cards, from a high end set. Different years, but same serial #ing (/35), same type of card. Why does Clark go for almost 30% more than Messier? It has NOTHING to do with stats, or the unquantifiable "greatness" of the two players... it's got nothing to do with the HOF. It has to do with popularity.

Bob Probert wasn't even as good at hockey as Clark was.... and his stuff does really well.


There's plenty of HOFers (think Clark Gillies, Dick Duff, Bernie Federko as three easy examples) who were fine players, but never once screamed "elite". Not in the class of Gretzky or Howe... but they're not even in the class of Sundin, or Lindros, Adam Oates. I'd be surprised if you can find a single example of a set (I'm thinking autos or game used) that contains both Clark Gillies & Wendel Clark.... and the WC doesn't outsell that CG.



Think of guys like Mike Gartner, Rod Langway, Larry Murphy, Ron Francis, and Michel Goulet. Great players, nobody cares about their stuff. Larry Robinson (IMO) is probably the 3rd greatest defenceman who ever lived. His stuff sells for dirt cheap when you consider his accomplishments.


The whole point of the common, semi-star, star is to tier the unlisted players. Then they only have to list Superstars, and rookies of note.

..... so for Brian Leetch vs Gary Suter: I'd be surprised that Suter isn't a semi-star, and Leetch isn't a star... but what do I know? I would point out if you're looking at the price guide aspect of it.... even if those two fall into the same category, it doesn't mean they are equal in value. BVs are not, and have never been, hard values. They're a range. If I said these "star players" for $1 - $2: Perhaps Suter goes for a buck everwhere outside of Calgary..... and Leetch is a $2 card everywhere. That sort of thing.


Also don't forget about regional bias. I would expect a Patrick Marleau RC (as an example) to be priced at the HI column value from Beckett... or even higher... at a card show in Ontario. I'd expect it to be priced at the Beckett LO column, and have a 50% off sticker, at a card show Alberta.

I agree that popularity, or even to some extent the aesthetics of a card plays a role in a player or cards value, but "star" and "semi-star" are subjective ideas.. And of course there will be regional bias but the Hall of Fame isn't subjective, you're either a Hall of Famer or you're not and yes indeed there are debates about certain Hall of Famers and weather they're worthy of the HOF; Dick Duff, Cam Neely, Clark Gillies etc are commonly debated - but they're in the HOF, hence IMO they should at least be recognized for it in the hobby, there should be a premium placed on their cards.. If a premium is going to be placed on a guy like Gary Suter, then why not a Hall of Famer like Paul Coffey?

Not to get off topic but Bob Probert was a very skilled player and I could easily make an argument he was as good if not better than Wendell Clark in just about every aspect of the game... Bob Probert was misused. Most think back on him as an enforcer but he was so much more -- he just happened to play in a very physical era where fighting was the norm and every team needed someone to play the role of enforcer and Bob Probert given his size and ability and willingness to fight fell into that role, however Probert is one of the few enforcers that could have played in the modern "skilled" NHL - he had actual scoring talent... You could call Probert a "poor mans Eric Lindros"...

As a matter of fact Bob Probert had one of the most ridiculous seasons in NHL history in 1987-88. The guy was an All-Star that year putting up 62 points in 74 games, and I know on face value that is a "so what" meaningless statistic considering being a .75 ppg player was nothing special in the 80's however when you factor in his 400 penalty minutes (398) that season it makes that stat-line incredible.. I mean there is zero doubt in my mind that Probert, had he played in the present would have been a Wayne Simmonds type of player - a very strong top 6 power forward that could find the back of the net..

Back on topic -

Perhaps I am looking at this issue too seriously, however it's just criminal that Hall of Fame players - even their rookie cards in some cases (see Scott Niedermayer) are basically commons..

You brought up the Oilers dynasty, and it's crazy to think that an 81-82 Jari Kurri RC holds as much value, if not less than a 92-93 UD Paul Kariya RC..

I think a lot of HOF players in general - but more specifically that played between 1980 and 2000 have been forgotten for the most part.. I mean if they're not Gretzky, Lemieux, Brodeur or Hasek they're deemed "junk" by Beckett hence not desirable to anyone beyond those that saw them play or anyone that collects for investment reasons.

[Savard18]

I've been convinced for many years that Beckett, today, just uses a formula. Player, set, production quantity, auto (sticker or not?), game used.... it all goes into blender, and they pop out a value range.

Scott Niedermayer, let's use him as an example. I'm not sure what you think it should be worth... but I'd be shocked if you can find a single person willing to pay $3 for his RC. There are 35 copies available on sportlots right now.... not a single one has an asking price higher than 91 cents. 17 of them have an asking price of 18 cents (which is the lowest asking price you'll find on the site). If I go back there next month, I'll be VERY surprised if there are less than 35 copies available.

I can hop on eBay right now and buy a PSA 10 of the card for $15 USD.

Remember... hockey cards only have value because they sell like a commodity. They're just cardboard pictures of hockey men. The only way that Niedermayer is going to sell for more than a couple of bucks, is if the demand rises sharply. I can assure that unless Scott Niedermayer himself decides to spend his money buying up copies of his 90-91 UD Rookie Card.... and just hording every single copy he can get his hands on.... it's never going to happen. The 10s of thousands of copies of that card that were printed: Anyone who wants a copy has one, and there is ample supply to ensure that the 100 (or so) people in 2019 that don't own one, and now want to, will be able to get it for next-to-nothing.

The idea that they should have a HOF category, with a higher multiplier vs stars..... I just don't see why. If the reality is that Scott Niedermayer and Theo Fleury sell for about the same.... why should Beckett be reporting differently ?

Going back to your Hull jersey example..... If the card sells for $4 - $8 (which is probably realistic, Hull is another very under appreciated Super Star) why should Beckett price it at $10 - $20 (you used $20 in your example....I'm just turning that into a range). Truth is, it probably sells for $4 - $8.

To some degree, you're probably right. If Beckett would list it at $10 - $20, and you were trying to sell it for $8.... you might get some interest, because someone might come along and think they're getting a great deal, and they can flip it for a profit (which wouldn't happen). Is the point of their price guide not to report what cards actually sell for?? Are they manipulating the hobby with their prices.... or are they just reporting on it?

I totally understand supply and demand (I'm very literate in economics)... Don't get me wrong, I was never under the illusion that in theory Beckett was just "making prices up" (tho some may argue that and they wouldn't be wrong in doing so) but the Niedermayer UD RC was a fantastic example as to my point. You can assume that there were just as many Glenn Healy RC's printed as there were Niedermayer's considering they're from the same year and the same set yet one "books" for $1 while the other "books" for .75 cents, one is a HOF'er, the other isn't....

Believe me I do understand that the supply on Niedermayer RC's outweighs the demand, but my original point is that if Beckett is going to go out of it's way to create sub-categories and place a value on them then Hall of Famers should have their own category, and as such there should be a premium placed on them.

For example:

1990-91 Upper Deck

Commons: 2 cents
Semi-stars: 10 cents (Neal Broten, Brian Bellows, Pat Verbeek, John Casey, Wendell Clark, Probert etc)
Stars: 25 cents (Craig Janney, Theo Fleury, Gary Suter, John Vanbiesbrouck, Roenick etc)
Hall of Famers: 75 cents (Paul Coffey, Pierre Turgeon, Grant Fuhr, Goulet, Trottier etc)..

I think distinctions should be made..

I mean if you had to pick one would you rather have the Craig Janney or the Paul Coffey?.. Most of us would take the Coffey hence that bias should be reflected in Beckett but it's not and that is the problem. There will be a higher demand for Hall of Famers than non-Hall of Famers no matter how little the demand is - there is still a difference in demand.

Look if there is a difference between a "star", "semi-star" and common then there is a difference between a star and a Hall of Famer..

[30ranfordfan]

I totally understand supply and demand (I'm very literate in economics)... Don't get me wrong, I was never under the illusion that in theory Beckett was just "making prices up" (tho some may argue that and they wouldn't be wrong in doing so) but the Niedermayer UD RC was a fantastic example as to my point. You can assume that there were just as many Glenn Healy RC's printed as there were Niedermayer's considering they're from the same year and the same set yet one "books" for $1 while the other "books" for .75 cents, one is a HOF'er, the other isn't....

This is a huge problem with Beckett. I think they're actually pretty good at reporting the values of cards.... what they're not very good at is updating the values.

Niedermayer was a $5 card at one point. Maybe even $10 ? I don't remember. There's enough market activity on Niedermayer (across all sets he's ever been in) to gauge what the values of his cards are doing.

The 75 cents the Niedermayer is listed for, is likely very accurate.

The problem is that there is so little market for a guy like Glenn Healy, that they've probably had that card listed for $1 for 20 years, and don't have enough data to change it (or simply don't care).

Niedermayer being 75 cents is fine. The issue is Healy should be listed for a quarter.

Believe me I do understand that the supply on Niedermayer RC's outweighs the demand, but my original point is that if Beckett is going to go out of it's way to create sub-categories and place a value on them then Hall of Famers should have their own category, and as such there should be a premium placed on them.

I think you're getting too hung up on the names of those categories. If they were called "Tier 1 Common", "Tier 2 Common", "Tier 3 Common" maybe it would make a difference?

Cards that warrant their own listing have it. They've got three classifications for the other players.... semi-star is simply a player that is better than a common, but not as good as a star. Which of the three groups a player falls into does not reflect his status in the game, but his status in the hobby.

For example:

1990-91 Upper Deck

Commons: 2 cents
Semi-stars: 10 cents (Neal Broten, Brian Bellows, Pat Verbeek, John Casey, Wendell Clark, Probert etc)
Stars: 25 cents (Craig Janney, Theo Fleury, Gary Suter, John Vanbiesbrouck, Roenick etc)
Hall of Famers: 75 cents (Paul Coffey, Pierre Turgeon, Grant Fuhr, Goulet, Trottier etc)..

I'm going to assume those players are from the actual Beckett lists for Semi-Star, and Star (you've just taken some HOFers out of the star category and created a new one for them).

Two problems. Again, Beckett isn't so good at maintenance. Neal Broten & John Casey are commons. So is Craig Janney and Gary Suter. In 2019.... I can not imagine there is any difference in the cardboard value of those four players... vs Vladimir Ruzickia, Norm Foster, Brian Benning, or David Oliver.

Suppose I was trying to complete a set of 1990-91 Upper Deck. I need 25 cards to finish it off. I'd expect to pay a premium for any star player RC (Bure, Federov, Modano, Belfour, Sundin, Potvin, Niedermayer etc). That premium would vary, but it would be there. For anything non-RC in that set? Outside of Gretzky, Lemieux, and Roy - the value is all the same IMO. Mark Messier, Craig Janney, Steve Weeks, and Paul Ranhiem all have the same value.

Modern sets: It's not a lot different. Do you really think that Patrick Kane's base card from 2018-19 UD will ACTUALLY sell for more than Jori Lethera's ???


Even the reality of pricing on things like base cards aside.... you're arguing that a card's value should reflect the stature that player has in the game.... HOF > Not-HOF..... 1,000 career points > 700 career points (same era).... that sort of thing.

We know that isn't true though. Felix Potvin barley in the top 50 for all time wins, but he'll outsell most of the guys ahead of him. Cam Ward has over 300 wins and a Stanley Cup, and he might as well be a common.

Ron Francis' cards are worth slightly more than Neal Broten's (still not much), yet he's the 5th leading scorer of all time.

When a non-Superstar gets elected to the HOF, it creates a buzz around their cards. HOF collectors will snap up a RC and/or Auto for their collection.... but that interest is gone after a few months. There's no evidence out there to suggest that collectors, on a wide scale, will place any extra value on a guy just because he's in the Hall of Fame.

I think distinctions should be made..

I mean if you had to pick one would you rather have the Craig Janney or the Paul Coffey?.. Most of us would take the Coffey hence that bias should be reflected in Beckett but it's not and that is the problem. There will be a higher demand for Hall of Famers than non-Hall of Famers no matter how little the demand is - there is still a difference in demand.

Look if there is a difference between a "star", "semi-star" and common then there is a difference between a star and a Hall of Famer..

If you're talking about hockey players... yes there is a difference. If you're talking about hockey cards, there isn't. That's the thing.

[Maggot]

Don't get me wrong, I was never under the illusion that in theory Beckett was just "making prices up" (tho some may argue that and they wouldn't be wrong in doing so)

If Beckett wasn't assigning the values arbitrarily and does base them on actual sales data, how do you explain them releasing pricing on products that are just days old and haven't even hit the secondary market yet? Then, after these prices are assigned, they are never updated except on only the most popular players or sets (Young Guns).

With that in mind, the only explanation for them assigning values of $5 to $8 on Canvas/Portraits inserts is that they're either working in UD's interest or that they're completely careless/incompetent.