From: dahoov2@cox.net
Thanks for explaining that. I have not come across that really before
though I do have another card I thought was a rookie and then figured
it wasn't so I am going to see if I can find it. So I apologize for
the previous post. I wonder though, doesn't this affect value. I
guess all Rookie cards aren't valuable though because a lot of
potential somebody's don't last. Then others are mediocre or average.
I am guessing Lee is a bit above average... I saw I got a decent deal
on the card, but it's not worth THAT much. I'll be getting it signed
though; I guess that could make it BETTER or WORSE. I have no clue
when it comes to baseball cards.
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:52:00 -0500, "Lee Cochenour"
wrote:
> Smith only pitched 21 innings in 1980 and 67 in 1981. It looks like he
>started both those years in the minor leagues. The trading card companies
>probably made cards for players that were on big league rosters or expected
>to be at the beginning of the season. Smith broke through about halfway
>throgh the 81 season, so 1982 was likely the first season that he started
>the year with the team, hence his rookie card. The way MLB does stats, his
>27 innings in 1980 weren't enough to categotrize him as a rookie. Officially
>1981 was his rookie season, but it was too late for the card companies to
>get his card out.
>
>Lee
>Check out the Celebrity Book SIgnings & Events Site:
>http://www.geocities.com/leecoke/
>
>
>"Sue H" wrote in message
>news:3g53541a4nvloumo03rme3mbd2jluvjrhi@4ax.com...
>> Even on the MLB.com site (auctions) endorsed by Becketts (and they are
>> the ones who mailed the item to us), advertised the card we won in an
>> auction as "Rookie card" and it's not. So apparently, even these
>> sites can be fishy. I won't whine about it. Total was three bucks
>> including shipping, but gee friggin' whiz, is ANYONE out there
>> honest?!
>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
