The Natural RC Discussion: 58th Edition

[gfel2795]

First forgive me for being an "RC purist". RCs are getting a bit shady with all the inserted ones in other products like UD Ice and Rookie Anthology.

Artifacts released their redemption checklist for the 2012-13 redemptions but these guys are all expected not to show up until 2013-14. Maybe it's time to rehatch the discussion of what constitutes a rookie card.

So does this mean that players like Yakupov will have all 2013-14 RCs and one 2012-13 Artifacts RC? More than one year RCs of a player hasn't yet happened. What gives?

[cygnusx1]

Personally I've never understood all the fuss about what constitutes a "true" RC. I find that the rarer and better looking card of a player's RC should be the more expensive, but alas, not always the case.

As for your question, I believe the 12-13 Yakupov Artifacts RC would be considered an XRC? Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

Furthermore, multiple year RC's have happened numerous times with the earlier ones being classified as XRC's. Multiple BAP or Artifacts redemptions, early SPx or Top Shelf redemptions, etc.

[jagrnyr68]

Would have to agree, if Yakupov has cards coming out in 13-14 that are considered RC's, then the 12-13 Artifacts should be an XRC

[JVW]

Would have to agree, if Yakupov has cards coming out in 13-14 that are considered RC's, then the 12-13 Artifacts should be an XRC

Excuse my lack of knowledge, but what does the 'X' mean for a Rookie Card?

[gfel2795]

X=Extended I think, if not it's news to me.

[87sluggo]

Here's where I have a problem...........

The 04/05 SPA Sidney Crosby redemption isn't a RC card because there was no 04/05 season, right?

But as far as the 12/13 Artifacts redemptions go..........there WAS a 12/13 season and Yakupov played in it and the redemptions match the RC's that were in the set...........maybe the redemptions will be marked 13/14? And then Artifacts will have a seperate class of 13/14 RC's in the 13/14 product?

I dunno, if I didn't have the Yakupov redemption I probably wouldn't care hahahaaa.

[Gallinator]

I agree that these will all be considered XRC cards. I think that most of the hobby understands and accepts the concept of the XRC and views it as a necessary evil to avoid having a RC of the same player across multiple years. I am OK with it, too - quick and easy. Whether or not that affects the value is purely up to collectors to decide.

[30ranfordfan]

Rookie Cards typically have to follow a couple of rules:

- Widley distributed set (i.e. not box set, like Ovation, that's only available @ Walmat)
- First year of licensed cards
- Part of the "main" set (i.e. follows the numbering of the base set)
- At least 99 copies


Now, these were the rules that a particular price guide has published for years. The first three rules there made sense for a long, long time.... the fourth one was really only introduced when they felt that Pacific introducing RCs #ed to a player's jersey number were too limited to count as rookies (in Titanium). Personally, I never cared for that rule, and don't really respect it. I believe it was generally accepted that the newer Titanium Cards, the ones #ed to jersey numbers are the "true" rookies (that's what Panini intended. They're the "main" cards, not the parallels) so I'd actually expect that everyone's favorite price guide has since backed down on that rule (though it's been many years since I read one, so I couldn't tell you that for a fact).


Anyway, the other three rules have lead to some interesting exceptions over the years:

1991-92 Parkhurst Update. The "update" set was available via mailin redeption only. Has the first cards of Ray Whitney & Bill Guerrin. Considered XRC, because the set was not widley available, thus their 1992-93 cards are considered RCs.

1991-92 Upper Deck Czech World Juniors, Mid-90s "Parkhurst International". The sets were origionally packaged for European release, but ended up finding their way back to North America. The 91-92 UD Czech set looks just like the WJC cards from their 91-92 Series 2, but has a much bigger checklist. Cards of Roman Hamrlik & Paul Karyia, a year before any others were made. The Park. International sets had XRCs of guys like Iginla, Briere & JS Guigere.

Any Ovation set (available @ Walmart only)

BAP Rookie Redemptions, 2007 & 2008??? (Pretty sure there are two years of them). These are the closest to what will happen with Artifacts and/or Certified...... Redeption cards are released one year (2007-08) but the cards are redeemed almost an entire calandar year later, for rookies from that season (following this example, 2008-09). So you'd get true RCs of the 07-08 guys live in packs, and then the redeptions would be good for 08-09 rookies. IMO - it was a stupid idea, that really never made sense.... and that's probably why UD stopped doing it after two years.

The important thing to remeber with those BAP XRC, and I'm sure what is happening with the Artifacts cards as well, they are not part of the main set. I think origionally the Artifacts were numbered like regular cards, but I'm pretty sure that Upper Deck is changing those card numbers. Is this nitpicking? Yes, absolutley. But based on most accepted definitions of a rookie card...... Card #199 would make it a rookie, where as #RR1 would not. Since both companies agreed not to print rookie cards of any of those players until this year, I would assume that they will follow this "technicality", add prefixes or some alternate numbering, thus making these "insert" cards, rather than part of the main set.


Does this muddy the waters? Yes it does. It's why both of those companies should never have made those redemptions in the first place. They don't add all that much value to the product (yes, when they first hit eBay the big names will be selling really well - but even that Yakupov will be a $45 card by January) they really just serve to confuse people, and create cranky customers waiting for info on who they'll get, before waiting for the actual card.






This is my biggest fear with the turn the hobby has made in the last few years. First of all, everything is very rookie centric now. The hot new rookie is what collectors want. It's been this way for a while. With two licensed manufacturers, Upper Deck and Panini are limited to 11 products each. I have to believe that this is, at least in part, to limit the number of Rookie Cards any particular player has on the market, in any given year. When they start adding "bonus" cards, as sets packaged within sets, they create even more, adding confusion along with even more content. I don't think that's a good thing, and I do believe it's only going to hurt the hobby going forward.

[30ranfordfan]

And just a follow up, to further illustrate my point about rookie cards, let's take a star player from that last few years..... Taylor Hall. He has the following Panini Rookie Cards:


Zenith
Score
Contenders
Pinnacle
Luxury Suite /199
Limited /299
Donruss
Dominion /99
Crown Royale /99
Certified /499
Adrenalyn

Artifacts /699
Black Diamond
O-Pee-CHee
SP Authentic /999
SP Game Used /99
SPx /499
The Cup /99
Ultimate Collection /99
Young Guns
Young Guns French
Victory


This doesn't include the Ice Rookie /99 (which I believe most people consider to be a Rookie Card, despite the set not actually being a release of UD's that year).


What I'm getting at is, is this more than enough? Changing out a product or three each year with others... yeah, go for it, but how many RCs of these guys does their really need to be? Why do we need Redemptions in Artifacts for the hottest new rookies? Can that set not sell itself without those? Put the holdover guys in, where there is usually a couple of decent names anyway, and sell me on the memoribilia & autographs - which Artifacts has usually been pretty good for. Is it really going to be a diservice to anyone, if Taylor Hall has one less Rookie Card on the market? I'd say it would actually be a service to collectors if he had a few less.

[gfel2795]

It would be interesting to figure out the print runs of the unnumbereds and take a count of how many RCs there are in each product and add them up to see what we're dealing with.

And just a follow up, to further illustrate my point about rookie cards, let's take a star player from that last few years..... Taylor Hall. He has the following Panini Rookie Cards:


Zenith
Score
Contenders
Pinnacle
Luxury Suite /199
Limited /299
Donruss
Dominion /99
Crown Royale /99
Certified /499
Adrenalyn

Artifacts /699
Black Diamond
O-Pee-CHee
SP Authentic /999
SP Game Used /99
SPx /499
The Cup /99
Ultimate Collection /99
Young Guns
Young Guns French
Victory


This doesn't include the Ice Rookie /99 (which I believe most people consider to be a Rookie Card, despite the set not actually being a release of UD's that year).


What I'm getting at is, is this more than enough? Changing out a product or three each year with others... yeah, go for it, but how many RCs of these guys does their really need to be? Why do we need Redemptions in Artifacts for the hottest new rookies? Can that set not sell itself without those? Put the holdover guys in, where there is usually a couple of decent names anyway, and sell me on the memoribilia & autographs - which Artifacts has usually been pretty good for. Is it really going to be a diservice to anyone, if Taylor Hall has one less Rookie Card on the market? I'd say it would actually be a service to collectors if he had a few less.