The taking of the Bowman set to the so-called superpremium level really began in 1994 with the birth of 1994 Bowman's Best. Half prospects/half veterans, $5.00 packs, and the first prospect refractors was a recipe that yearned for success, but only filled a small niche in that market.
The Bowman set collectors wanted an abundance of prospects to feed their once and future hype machine and the new superpremium collectors wanted refractors of stars like Finest gave them. It split the middle between the two, and people liked it...to an extent. I don't remember anyone clamoring for the next Bowman's Best release.
In 1995, the set followed the same pattern, but the greatly loved and invested in rookie class buoyed the set value to never before seen levels. Vladimir Guerrero, Andruw Jones, Scott Rolen, Richie Sexson, Bartolo Colon, Bobby Abreu..Any prospector worth his salt knew at least 3 of those names. I never saw a pack of this for less than $10.00. The relative scarcity compared to the previous year's set thanks to the baseball strike, the strong rookie class, and the continued love of refractors kept this product off the remaining hobby store shelves.
There was nothing special about the 1996 release on the surface. The rookie class was considered weak even at the time. Anyone remember the draft from 1995 off hand? The guaranteed value didn't extend to the Bowman's Best set. There was one aspect which has remained a staple of the hobby; multi-layered refractor parallels. These were the first of their kind, introducing the so-called atomic refractor. I have one from 1999; I want an original before the design was changed.
Another innocuous event was the introduction of Topps Chrome in 1996. I was a very traditional set-builder at the time. I thought that was a waste. More money for less cards per pack for the same cards you could get before except with a different finish. Why not just call it, "Topps printing presses are down, let's put some metal on the card."? It was a fad that became a revolution.
Bowman Chrome debuted in 1997. 4 card packs for $3.00. 4 cards! For a 300 card set! What's the point? The popularity expanded as well as the price. It helped that the 1997 rookie class had some strong characters in it (though not the same ones we'd think are strong today). There were refractors, there were refractors of parallels, there was chrome in its infantile glory. I succumbed to the hype; I bought a card of some one I ever heard of (Derrick Gibson) because it was a 1997 Bowman Chrome card, and it wasn't even a proper rookie.
Through the end of the '90s, the king of Chrome remained atop the heap of the Bowman offerings. This is when I left the collecting game for awhile. But Bowman and its offspring continued to evolve as the millennium turned.
Showing posts with label Bowman Tales. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bowman Tales. Show all posts
Jun 3, 2009
Tales of a Former Bowman Collector: Part 3
By 1992, Bowman had established its identity of the unknown, not yet played in the majors (or maybe even in the minors) players. In this year, it was decided to up the ante; the set size was increased to 704 cards in one series, the finish of the cards went from cardboard stock to gloss, and there was the new addition of one foil card per pack. It is in this instance that they sought to create the iconic rookie card of a player by both being ahead of the competition and increasing the quality of the set.
This is reflected in the player selection of 1992 Bowman. From 1st round draft picks like Manny Ramirez to late round draft picks as favors of a godfather like Mike Piazza, the player selection focused on one trait only. Are you a potential up and comer to the major league scene? Some notable players like Trevor Hoffman, Mariano Rivera, and Carlos Delgado didn't have cards until the following year or sometimes years, and the Bowman brand really milked this fact. Of course, the downside to this is that there are a lot of photos of players in Hawaiian shirts or posed in front of their high schools. Oh well, at least it wasn't factory airbrushing that will always looks fake.
These cards plus others of draft picks from 1990 and 1991 were soon sought after. There were articles in Beckett about how the "best" card was the more desirable and more valuable card than a rookie card. The best examples were Pedro Martinez, Jim Thome, and Chipper Jones 1992 Bowman cards. The rookies of Martinez and Thome were only in 1991 Upper Deck Final Edition, a set that has never been a light in collectors' eyes. So their 1992 Bowman card, with the gloss, and "rookie card aura" of the set soon outstripped their rookie card in popularity and "book value".
The other piece that made this Bowman set step to the next level was the addition of the foil card in every pack. Why? Because it had a shiny border,simple as that. Foil was the new wave of innovation (as evidenced by the popularity of ToppsGold). These weren't parallel cards and were no more rare than other base cards in the set, but they added an extra reason to pursue the set through packs. Of course, the packs were too expensive for my 10 year old budget.
1993 Bowman and 1994 Bowman followed the same format with practically the same base set size and interspersal of Bowman cards. There was one significant difference though. For the first time, starting with the 1993 set, there was pre-set hype. This led to gross inflation of pack prices until people realized that the rookie class just wasn't as strong as the previous year's and the cards were about 1000x easier to find. I bought my fair share of 1994 Bowman packs for $2.00; I think i was looking for the Rickey Bottalico (if that's even real).
In 1995, the hype of Vladimir Guerrero and Andruw Jones (especially) drove the pack prices up. There also was a perceived scarcity compared to the '93 and '94 sets. And in a move of pure gutsiness, the "Guaranteed Value" Program was instituted for the 1996 set. Collect the whole set and send it into Topps by a certain date for $100 cold, hard cash. I think everyone (see: Bowman collectors) wanted the set, but they weren;t going to send it in. Of course, it was going to increase in value just like 1995's version did. The next year, the place of the base Bowman brand among prospectors shifted dramatically.
This is reflected in the player selection of 1992 Bowman. From 1st round draft picks like Manny Ramirez to late round draft picks as favors of a godfather like Mike Piazza, the player selection focused on one trait only. Are you a potential up and comer to the major league scene? Some notable players like Trevor Hoffman, Mariano Rivera, and Carlos Delgado didn't have cards until the following year or sometimes years, and the Bowman brand really milked this fact. Of course, the downside to this is that there are a lot of photos of players in Hawaiian shirts or posed in front of their high schools. Oh well, at least it wasn't factory airbrushing that will always looks fake.
These cards plus others of draft picks from 1990 and 1991 were soon sought after. There were articles in Beckett about how the "best" card was the more desirable and more valuable card than a rookie card. The best examples were Pedro Martinez, Jim Thome, and Chipper Jones 1992 Bowman cards. The rookies of Martinez and Thome were only in 1991 Upper Deck Final Edition, a set that has never been a light in collectors' eyes. So their 1992 Bowman card, with the gloss, and "rookie card aura" of the set soon outstripped their rookie card in popularity and "book value".
The other piece that made this Bowman set step to the next level was the addition of the foil card in every pack. Why? Because it had a shiny border,simple as that. Foil was the new wave of innovation (as evidenced by the popularity of ToppsGold). These weren't parallel cards and were no more rare than other base cards in the set, but they added an extra reason to pursue the set through packs. Of course, the packs were too expensive for my 10 year old budget.
1993 Bowman and 1994 Bowman followed the same format with practically the same base set size and interspersal of Bowman cards. There was one significant difference though. For the first time, starting with the 1993 set, there was pre-set hype. This led to gross inflation of pack prices until people realized that the rookie class just wasn't as strong as the previous year's and the cards were about 1000x easier to find. I bought my fair share of 1994 Bowman packs for $2.00; I think i was looking for the Rickey Bottalico (if that's even real).
In 1995, the hype of Vladimir Guerrero and Andruw Jones (especially) drove the pack prices up. There also was a perceived scarcity compared to the '93 and '94 sets. And in a move of pure gutsiness, the "Guaranteed Value" Program was instituted for the 1996 set. Collect the whole set and send it into Topps by a certain date for $100 cold, hard cash. I think everyone (see: Bowman collectors) wanted the set, but they weren;t going to send it in. Of course, it was going to increase in value just like 1995's version did. The next year, the place of the base Bowman brand among prospectors shifted dramatically.
May 27, 2009
Tales of a Former Bowman Collector: Part 2
The "next big thing" had been a large part of the baseball card hobby for many years before I made my perfunctory discovery. The 1984 Donruss Don Mattingly and the 1986 Donruss Jose Canseco were two of the more prominent examples of collectors seeking out and hoarding prominent rookie cards of stars-in-the-making.
When the extreme overproduction era hit in 1987/1988, it wasn't just a matter of identifying the up and coming youngsters making their debuts on the major league rosters. It was about finding the prospect of the moment and making a financial killing on the cards by flipping them quickly before anyone was the wiser about their lack of future superstar ability and/or overabundance of these cards. The first example that comes to mind is Gregg Jefferies. Others may include such luminaries as Sam Horn, Phil Plantier, Kevin Maas, etc. How to invest in these rookies was simple; buy 100 card lots and sell as much as you can when the up arrow in the Beckett appeared (because no one understood what that really meant).
In 1989, the Bowman brand was introduced, primarily as a a nostalgia kick by Topps. However, there was something different about the brand. It included an overabundance of rookie cards (in terms of percentage) compared to the normal Topps base set. I opened one pack that year, and I honestly hated them. I couldn't properly rubberband the cards or store them in my album; they were too large!
One aspect did stick with me, for some cards (the first ones I saw were Ed Sprague and Tino Martinez), it simply said in the statistics section, "No Prior MLB Experience". How can they have a card without experience thought my wondering 8 year old mind?
As we see in subsequent years, it was a concerted effort to get the first card of a player out by Topps before any other company. This they normally could do because they signed individual contracts with players rather than going through the MLB Players Association.
1990 and 1991 Bowman (though extremely ugly in design) followed the same concept in providing a high percentage of first or rookie cards in the sets. It wasn't until 1992 when Bowman as a brand hit its stride
When the extreme overproduction era hit in 1987/1988, it wasn't just a matter of identifying the up and coming youngsters making their debuts on the major league rosters. It was about finding the prospect of the moment and making a financial killing on the cards by flipping them quickly before anyone was the wiser about their lack of future superstar ability and/or overabundance of these cards. The first example that comes to mind is Gregg Jefferies. Others may include such luminaries as Sam Horn, Phil Plantier, Kevin Maas, etc. How to invest in these rookies was simple; buy 100 card lots and sell as much as you can when the up arrow in the Beckett appeared (because no one understood what that really meant).
In 1989, the Bowman brand was introduced, primarily as a a nostalgia kick by Topps. However, there was something different about the brand. It included an overabundance of rookie cards (in terms of percentage) compared to the normal Topps base set. I opened one pack that year, and I honestly hated them. I couldn't properly rubberband the cards or store them in my album; they were too large!
One aspect did stick with me, for some cards (the first ones I saw were Ed Sprague and Tino Martinez), it simply said in the statistics section, "No Prior MLB Experience". How can they have a card without experience thought my wondering 8 year old mind?
As we see in subsequent years, it was a concerted effort to get the first card of a player out by Topps before any other company. This they normally could do because they signed individual contracts with players rather than going through the MLB Players Association.
1990 and 1991 Bowman (though extremely ugly in design) followed the same concept in providing a high percentage of first or rookie cards in the sets. It wasn't until 1992 when Bowman as a brand hit its stride
May 12, 2009
Tales of a Former Bowman Collector: Part 1
I am or was a Bowman set collector. I have been for many years. I may not always succeed with the sets I had initially pursued, but there is always the inkling that one day it will be complete. My eventual goal is to have every Bowman (and Bowman Draft Picks set) from 1989-2005. I am also open to collecting Bowman Chrome sets that do not have the autographed cards as a part of the base set itself. But that's not the reason for this post. The previews for 2009 Bowman have arrived and the product looks extremely disappointing in both design and format.
Bowman has never been a bastion of great card design. 1990 Bowman might be one my least favorite designs ever. But the brand had always had a hook, the rookie cards of people that the everyday baseball fan had never heard of. Particularly, during the time period before the rise of MLB.com, the draft was a clandestine enterprise held on the answering machines and conference calls of team general managers. Beyond the first round, there was really no attention paid to who was drafted when, and who eventually populated the minor league squads. Also, even in the local paper, you only received scores and stats for the AA and AAA minor league affiliates. Those without a Sporting News subscription or Baseball America book simply did not have access to this information.
I really did not actively pursue Bowman sets until 1995. Before that, I rarely could buy packs that were greater than $2.00. The first set that caught my eye, 1992 Bowman, was going for $3.00 in my local card shop. I, of course, was relegated to getting 1992 Topps for $0.69 since I had to rely on the generosity of my parents.
During that year, I saw a prospect special, probably on Baseball Tonight, talking about Vlad Guerrero, the new Montreal wunderkind. Simply, I wanted his card. I went to one of the local card stores and bought a couple packs for $1.99. I liked the cards; I liked the one foil per pack configuration and the design was less foily than conventional Topps that year. I went back the next week and bought two more packs for $2.49. The price raised because of inventory restock; this was a common occurrence for certain sets. The next time I went there, packs were $5.49; I could not afford that within my normal monthly card budget. That was the end of 1995 Bowman packs for me.
But the image of the next big thing in baseball stuck with me as my collecting habits evolved.
Bowman has never been a bastion of great card design. 1990 Bowman might be one my least favorite designs ever. But the brand had always had a hook, the rookie cards of people that the everyday baseball fan had never heard of. Particularly, during the time period before the rise of MLB.com, the draft was a clandestine enterprise held on the answering machines and conference calls of team general managers. Beyond the first round, there was really no attention paid to who was drafted when, and who eventually populated the minor league squads. Also, even in the local paper, you only received scores and stats for the AA and AAA minor league affiliates. Those without a Sporting News subscription or Baseball America book simply did not have access to this information.
I really did not actively pursue Bowman sets until 1995. Before that, I rarely could buy packs that were greater than $2.00. The first set that caught my eye, 1992 Bowman, was going for $3.00 in my local card shop. I, of course, was relegated to getting 1992 Topps for $0.69 since I had to rely on the generosity of my parents.
During that year, I saw a prospect special, probably on Baseball Tonight, talking about Vlad Guerrero, the new Montreal wunderkind. Simply, I wanted his card. I went to one of the local card stores and bought a couple packs for $1.99. I liked the cards; I liked the one foil per pack configuration and the design was less foily than conventional Topps that year. I went back the next week and bought two more packs for $2.49. The price raised because of inventory restock; this was a common occurrence for certain sets. The next time I went there, packs were $5.49; I could not afford that within my normal monthly card budget. That was the end of 1995 Bowman packs for me.
But the image of the next big thing in baseball stuck with me as my collecting habits evolved.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)