Blog posts about specific baseball cards--images of the card itself and info about the player and his career--and commentary about baseball in general.
Showing posts with label Pujols. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pujols. Show all posts
Friday, November 27, 2015
Mike Trout 2011 Bowman Draft RC
Photos: from my own collection
Here's a Mike Trout Bowman Draft rookie card.
This is not to be confused with the 2011 Mike Trout Bowman Chrome rookie card, or the 2011 Mike Trout Bowman Chrome Draft rookie card. Both cards with "draft" in the name are #101, while the Chrome is #175. Go figure. What I can tell you is that when I went to bid on these, and the many dozens of other options that showed up, I had to look at my Beckett Graded book to see which one was which time and time again, since the three different cards also have different values. I had to stop a few times and adjust my eyes, and it doesn't help that the listings on Ebay are often misleading or flat-out incorrect. The sellers didn't seem to know what they were selling, at times, since some said they were selling a Bowman Chrome when they were actually selling a Bowman Chrome Draft. There were many other misleading tags as well. Crazy. And, oh yeah, there are tons of bunched-together listings in the Beckett book, and they tended to blur together after awhile, too.
I also had to look at the established Mike Trout rookie cards from cardboardconnection.com, which lists the actual rookie cards of every important player. This is now necessary, since there are so many cards that say "rookie" or "RC" on them, but they're not actual rookies, they just got released in the player's rookie year. That makes it a rookie, right? No, because there are so many subsets from the same card company that not each of them are considered rookies. Plus, there are a lot of "prospect" cards, which used to mean rookie, but now doesn't. And some players have a rookie card even before their rookie year or their prospect card--see: Mark McGwire's Olympics card, which is his rookie.
For those who're wondering, Mike Trout's only rookie cards are: 2011 Bowman Chrome #175; 2011 Bowman Chrome Draft #101; 2011 Bowman Draft #101; 2011 Bowman Sterling #22 (Good luck! That one's BV is $150 for a NmMt 8 and $500 for a Gem 9.5 / 10); 2011 Finest Baseball #94 and 2011 Topps Update #US175. (See how the Chrome and Topps is #175? That's because Topps owns Bowman, but all the Bowman Draft sets and subsets are #101.) That's a lot to see, and blur through, while you're sorting out listings by condition, cost, reputation and listing accuracy--the last of which was terrible!
And thank you to Cardboard Connection for providing those separate rookie and prospect listings.
By the way, did you know that prospect cards are released before the rookie cards, so you'll see them before you see the rookie cards, which used to be the ones you'd see first? And some prospect cards are traded and bought like they're rookies, and are often worth much more than the rookie cards!
Anyway, as I mentioned in the previous Bryce Harper entry, I don't usually buy recent rookie cards. Bryce Harper is an exception worth taking a chance on. Mike Trout is an exception you have to take a chance on. Trout is a no-brainer, like Pujols was, but more so, because Pujols was so obvious, and so alone in the field of new players at the time, that he didn't even have to be awesome to be the one to buy at that time.
Mike Trout is different because he is shoulders above some very impressive newer players in the past few years. Bryce Harper also stands out almost as much. But there's also Paul Goldschmidt, the most underrated player in baseball, who's finished second in the MVP voting the past two straight years, and who noticed? Very quiet player who plays for a very bad team; had he played for the Yankees, we'd be talking about him like we do Trout and Harper. (I've been trying to get a Goldschmidt rookie, too, though I have far surpassed my holiday spending. But a Mint Condition Goldschmidt Topps Update RC is only $10--and that's Buy It Now, not even bidding. (Bids tend to be a few bucks cheaper.) Anyway, I feel Goldschmidt is a sleeper, and I'm going to get his rookie now while it's cheap. I just did the same with Jose Altuve's, which is just plain cheap; I got 7 Altuve Bowman RCs for $7, including shipping. Ungraded, sure, but I gave to a friend the one with a few corner dings, and I'll send the best of the others to get graded and take my chances.
And we haven't talked about Rizzo, or Correa, or Arrieta, or any of the other ones. These last 3-4 years have been amongst the best three to four year stretch for rookies since the early 90s.
Anyway, Mike Trout stands way above all of these guys, and the collectors seem to know it, since his ungraded Bowman cards sell for about $20 when bidding, and over $30 for Buy It Now. Lots of buyers are Buying It Now, too, which tells me they're in very high demand, since experienced Ebay shoppers would rather spend $10 more just to know they can get one.
I spent $19.38 for the one pictured above, and that includes shipping.
So I'm taking a chance, because once I send it away, it has to be graded an 8 or better for me to break even. In fact, an 8 is just $20 BV, so I'll lose out a little bit because I have to pay for it to be graded (I wait for the $5 or $7 specials from SGC) and I have to pay about a buck combined for shipping and insurance. (I send 10 cards at a time to SGC, because it costs the same to ship and insure 1 card as it does 10 cards, so you may as well do 10.)
Since I'm spending another $7 to $9 or so on the grading, shipping and insuring, I need this card to get graded at least an NmMt+ 8.5, worth $25, in order to break even. I have no idea whether this card is that or not, as I have long ago decided that I'm not going to drive myself crazy predicting a grading company's grade for a card, since I have conclusive evidence that they're often wildly off their own grading scale, and so it's basically a crapshoot. This is especially true of newer cards. (I've been very good at grading T206s--but the grading companies have been much more consistent with their grades for those, too.) Even cards from the mid-80s have been graded one or two grades different than I'd predicted. Why's my 1980 Rickey Henderson RC an 8 rather than a 9--which is a difference of about $275 in Ebay bidding value? Couldn't tell you. What's the difference between my Rickey 8 and the previous Rickey 7 it just replaced? I don't know. The corners and the gloss and the centering are the same.
Will this one break even? I don't know, but here's why it's worth the chance for me, and also why I bought a 2011 Mike Trout Bowman Chrome RC and a 2011 Mike Trout Bowman Chrome Draft RC:
--Trout's RC values have increased lately and, I believe, will continue to do so. For a long time.
--My Trout Chrome RC is a 9 and the Chrome Draft RC is a 9.5, so I've got my Mint condition Mike Trout rookie card situation covered. (Those deals will be blogged about when they come in.)
--If this one is a dud--say, a 6 or 7--I can give it as a gift to either a relative or a friend of mine. Neither takes this anywhere near as seriously as I do, and would love to have a Trout rookie of any grade.
--Worst possible scenario: I can sell it at the occasional yard sale I have every other summer, and I can get $20 to $25 for it, no problem, especially from older folks who love baseball but hate the internet. And there's lots of those!
And that's why I bought an ungraded Mike Trout rookie, and would do so again, for either the relative or the friend who doesn't get this one.
Sorry for the long entry!
Labels:
#,
$,
1980,
2011,
baseball,
Beckett,
Bowman,
Bryce Harper,
buy,
BV,
card,
Chrome,
Correa,
draft,
Mike Trout,
Pujols,
Rickey Henderson,
Rizzo,
sell,
SGC
Monday, June 9, 2014
Baseball as of June 9, 2014
Photo: Albert Pujols' 2001 Upper Deck Rookie Card
Hard to believe it's been so long! Well, you can see how the Sox's season has gone, so there's not too much for me to add. So a few quick things:
--Last year the Sox supremely overachieved; this year they're supremely underachieving. They weren't as good as they looked last year, and they aren't as bad as they look this year. Both are extremes, and their true ability is the average...
--...but I'll take a World Series-winning year and a subpar year anytime over two ho-hom average years. Gimme two years of 100-62 and 62-100 over two years of 81-81 and 81-81 anytime. The first pair gets you a World Series ring and a good draft pick. The other two? Nothing.
--This year is what last year was supposed to be--a transition year.
--The difference? Last year they had unbelievable comebacks and unbelievable pitching. This year they have mostly good / very good pitching--but not unbelievable--and very few comeback wins. They're simply not hitting with RISP. If they were, at all, they might be in first place in the very mediocre American League East.
--The Sox and the Blue Jays have essentially flip-flopped seasons compared to last year. The Jays should've been great last year and fizzled. With almost exactly the same team, they're excelling. The Sox excelled last year and are floundering this year with essentially the same team--minus Ellsbury, of course.
--But the Jays are not this good. Normally I'd say that they're going to start to sink, but, again, they're the Sox of last year. Ya never know.
--R.A. Dickey so far is having a Tim Wakefield year when Wake would reel off 10-12 straight wins in the mid-90s. Such is the nature of the knuckleball, though to be fair Dickey throws a lot of curves and "fastballs" as well.
--The Yanks may have a decent year, but they won't win the division, and may not even make the playoffs. I'd be surprised if any Wild Card team comes from the A.L. East this year.
--Ellsbury's impact is truly being felt as the Sox flounder. People forget how good offensively he was, and how much his speed effected the pitches Pedroia and Victorino saw. The latter two are great fastball hitters, and that's what they got with Ellsbury on first base. He made everybody else in the lineup better, plus he tired out the pitcher when he threw to first a lot. He also drove in a lot of runs for a leadoff batter, and had good power from the leadoff spot.
--Having said that, I wouldn't have resigned him for more than three or four years, either. The Yanks had better win with him now, because they surely won't with him in the fifth through seventh years of his contract.
--I have a graded NM-MT+ Pujols Upper Deck RC, so I need him to have a monster comeback year.
Labels:
2001,
American,
baseball,
baseball card,
Blue Jays,
card,
draft,
east,
Ellsbury,
league,
pick,
Pujols,
Red Sox,
rookie,
Sox,
Upper Deck,
Wild Card,
win,
World Series,
Yankees
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


