Archive for patch cards

Softening my stance on ManuPatches

Posted in Newspaperman with tags , , , on July 27, 2010 by Cardboard Icons

I’m on record as saying I hate ManuPatches. Well, after acquiring one of a team that I like, I’m softening my stance a bit.

Don’t get me wrong, I still dislike the idea of a ManuPatch that spells out words that have loose connections to the pictures player. I am still turned off by the idea that companies wouldn’t label the patch cards as being non-game-used. And the biggest crock of them all is the auto ManuPatch which gives you a crappy looking autograph in 99 percent of the cases.

Now here’s the twist … I added a Red Sox auto ManuPatch this weekend and I absolutely love it.

Hypocrite. Traitor. Bastard.

Yes, in some ways I suppose I am one of these. But hear me out.

Look at this card. LOOK AT IT! It’s freakin’ beautiful. There is no denying it.

That said, I’d be just as happy if the card were just a patch and there was no player attached. I don’t give  a crap that this card is signed by Dustin Richardson. I probably would have paid the same price ($10) if it were just a sewn patch.

So here’s my official stance on ManuPatches: These things can work if: 1) companies ditch the autographs; 2) make sure they are clearly marked as being replicas; 3) don’t use them to spell out dumb things like “Slugger” or “Rookie” 4) don’t make them THE main draw and 5) stop making cheap patches that are simply glued to the card.

The key to a good looking patch is for the letter to be sewn onto replica jersey material. The stuff that Topps adds to the retail basic blasters just doesn’t cut it for me.

Rethinking my stance on Manufactured Patch cards

Posted in Newspaperman with tags , , , , , , , , on December 26, 2009 by Cardboard Icons

The other day I received in the mail two 2009 Upper Deck Icons baseball manufactured patches that I purchased on eBay for like $2.50 each. They were definitely an impulse buy on my behalf; I do no collect manu-patches, and neither Jose Reyes or Jay Bruce are really guys I collect. I bought them because the price seemed right and the cards looked somewhat appealing; or maybe the price made them appealing?

Nonetheless, they arrived on Christmas Eve and when I held the cards, something felt different — I kind of enjoyed the purchase. For more than a year I have been bitching (via comments on other blogs) about my hatred for manufactured patches. I’ve owned a few in recent years and each one I have dealt for almost next to nothing because they are not typically the type of card I chase.

But when the Reyes and Bruce arrived this week, I started thinking about what I really dislike about the Lettermen-style cards, and here’s what I came up with:

1) Signatures: Topps and Upper Deck have been guilty of producing signed Lettermen-style patches. This crap needs to stop. There is nothing appealing about seeing a signature cramped into a small fake patch. I have yet to see a signed manu-patch that actually looks good. And that’s not even counting Topps pathetic attempt last year with a certain football product that used a freakin’ sticker on the manu-patch card. Bleh.

2) Serial Numbering: I am convinced that the serial number on these type of cards are created with the sole purpose of tricking collectors into thinking what they have obtained is super rare. Most people know by now that these cards are not game-used, but someone coming back into the hobby after a year or two off is going to get duped because they just pulled from a pack or bought off eBay a card that is serial numbered to a low print run. Bottom line, ditch the numbering; either get rid of the cards or make a ton of them.

3) What they spell: I’m fine if the letters on the cards are used to spell out the name of the player; it just seems right. But don’t do what UD did with this Jay Bruce Lettermen. What’s the “G” supposed to be from? Oh yeah, Bruce Almighty. Lame.

I’m not saying that I love these cards, but what I am saying is that I can see how they can be collected and accepted. If the companies followed all of the points I brought up above, I may actually considering buying a few more. Just don’t expect me to pay “Hit” prices for these cards, after all, they are cards containing manu-patches, not actual pieces of a jersey.

The sweetest patch card I’ve ever pulled

Posted in Newspaperman with tags , , , , , , on November 28, 2009 by Cardboard Icons

There are some awesome patch cards on the the market these days, some of which are COMPLETE patches from jerseys. Just awesome. But in 2004, not many of those cards existed, collectors were left to collect multi-colored patch cards as this 2004 Hot Prospects Draft Edition ‘Double Team” card of Carlos Beltran.

This card is stunning in person. I pulled it from a box of Hot Prospects I purchased about two years ago. It features patches from his Astros jersey and Royals jersey. Both patches are multi-colored and feature several breaks. as you can see here. And to top it off, the card if serial numbered to just 50 copies.



Card of the Day: 2005 Prime Patches Portraits Logo C.C. Sabathia

Posted in Card of the Day with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 7, 2008 by Cardboard Icons

With C.C. Sabathia’s trade over the weekend to the Milwaukee Brewers, I felt it time to discuss this particular card: 2005 Prime Patches Portraits Team Logo, serial numbered 136. This card features a swatch of Sabathia’s game-used road uniform with a three-color patch from the team’s logo, which was sewn into the chest of the jersey. What I’ve been unable to discern is if this patch is from the infamous Indian head mascot — which is highly controversial — or from the script “I” the team has taken a liking to in recent years. At first I figured it was the Indian head mascot, but the patch is a bit rigid for that. Notice straight lines and apparent 75 degree angle at the bottom. Anyone have any insight? As for the card and Sabathia itself, I always wondered how other team collectors feel about memorabilia cards of players who are traded from their teams. I think there is some initial sorrow, and the market softens tremendously. But in the long run, do team collectors — and by those I mean who collect everyone who ever donned their team’s jersey — really care? Personally, if I had a chance to acquire a sweet Johnny Damon patch from his days with the Sox, I would not be able to pass it up. But that’s just me.