I know this has been asked before but ...

[icefields]

i remember asking about this to other members here a few years back and receiving different answers
so bear with me while i asked again.

are canvas young guns considered rookie cards?

i know parallels arent considered rookie cards but someone once told me that young guns are the exception.
i dont recall what the final determinization was. and if it is an exception are there others?

thank you

[pwskelly]

I guess it depends on who you ask. If you consult price guides, then they are not, they are considered parallels. The regular YG is considered the RC. The same applies to exclusives and high gloss YGs. These are also considered parallels rather than RCs.

[RGM81]

Rookie Year, not Rookie Card.

[icefields]

thats what i thought,

so the future watch and the future watch autos .. just the FW is the RC correct?

and does that apply to redemption rookie cards as well.

or limited show cards (not numbered/stamped) just produced to certain events.?
and team produced teams cards non upper deck - are they considered rookie cards

[creasecollector]

thats what i thought,

so the future watch and the future watch autos .. just the FW is the RC correct?

and does that apply to redemption rookie cards as well.

or limited show cards (not numbered/stamped) just produced to certain events.?
and team produced teams cards non upper deck - are they considered rookie cards

If the player doesn't have a Future Watch Autograph, then the Future Watch non-auto is the true rookie card.

If a player does have a Future Watch Autograph card /999, then that autographed card would be considered a "True" rookie card.

Team Sets or Expo/Show stamped cards are not considered true rookie cards, no.

[icefields]

okay thank you

[canucksfan007]

I think the commonly agreed upon definition of a "True" rookie card has to meet these standards:

1 - Has to be part of a base set

2 - Has to be pack pulled from its own product ( this would mean none of the random Exquisite cards are true rookies )

3 - There can only be ONE true rookie card from each product, like others have mention, the rest are just rookie year cards


Obviously there are some exceptions:

Example - 13/14 Ice Rookies
- Ice was not a stand alone set ( bonus packs inserted in various sets ). But because Ice rookies have basically had the same configuration since 03/04, most people consider these true rookies. Kind of a one off for some reason by UD to stop that set, then start it back up in 14/15

[Stryfex]

I'm not sure that definition is "commonly agreed upon" to be honest. As far as I know it the rules are:

1. Has to be part of the base set - generally requires it to be naturally numbered with the other cards in the set
2. If parallels exist within the set, only the "regular" version is considered true rookie
3. If there are multiple cards that meet the criteria then the first instance of the card is the true rookie (trilogy necessitates this rule)

Your #2 in particular I don't think is accurate. Example are the update young guns which come from SPA but are part of the Upper Deck core set - I believe they are still considered true rookies except in the rare case where the young guns from the update is actually not the only young guns for the player

I think the commonly agreed upon definition of a "True" rookie card has to meet these standards:

1 - Has to be part of a base set

2 - Has to be pack pulled from its own product ( this would mean none of the random Exquisite cards are true rookies )

3 - There can only be ONE true rookie card from each product, like others have mention, the rest are just rookie year cards


Obviously there are some exceptions:

Example - 13/14 Ice Rookies
- Ice was not a stand alone set ( bonus packs inserted in various sets ). But because Ice rookies have basically had the same configuration since 03/04, most people consider these true rookies. Kind of a one off for some reason by UD to stop that set, then start it back up in 14/15