The Weirdness of Rookie Cards: A Fascinating Case Study

So, I recently won a 1959 Topps Frank Herrera, card #129 (image below; not the actual card I won).



Would seem like a perfectly ordinary card, no? Not quite. For despite the fact that this card is part of the "Sporting News Rookie Stars" series in the '59 Topps set (cards 116-146), it turns out that Mr. Herrera's '59 issue is NOT his RC. Well, okay, that's not so strange. I've encountered that before among these so-called 'rookie stars.' Except, it turns out that his rookie card is actually his 1960 card, #130, issued (obviously to all of us who understand the Julian calendar) one year later (image below).



But it gets more ridiculous: Turns out Mr. Herrera (who should've more accurately been known as Juan, Francisco, or Pancho, but not Frank - reminds me of the old Roberto Clemente story about how Pittsburgh reporters kept insisting on calling him 'Bob,' even though he asked them not to) also had a 1958 card, one that's actually quite valuable if you have the one where his name is misspelled (image below, NOT the valuable version).



All this for a guy who had a truly un-noteworthy career that only touched parts of '58, '60, and '61 before he was out of the league.

But wait! It keeps going: In 1961, Mr. Herrera, un-notable though he was, actually had an All-Star card (and nothing else - no regular player card; see below):



WTF?

Anyway, my point being: Does anyone know the specifics of how rookie cards are determined? This case just doesn't make any sense to me. In fact, it seems to confound any normal logic. He had a card in '58, and he had a designated 'rookie' card in '59, but his rookie is his '60. (And let's not even touch the bizarre '61 all-star situation.) Does RC status have to do with games played in the pertinent season? Is that it? Or is it something else? I just don't get it. If you've been issued a card previously, why isn't that your rookie card, period?

Seeking clarification!

just do like everyone else...make up your own rookie card rules that suit your needs in that moment.

That's funny in that case I would take the 1958 for sure. I've never been a big rookie card collector... but in a lot of cases I will buy their second year ... or even a different year if it's more attractive to me...much cheaper too!!!!

Heck...33' goudey ruth rc's are still an absolute steal!!!!

That is really a cool story.

I personally see no fascination with the "Rookie" card thing. If I want a player I try to buy the most attractive card to me.

Lee

Herrera and his cards have been an enigma to me for years, although not so much from the rookie card standpoint. When I was collecting post-war, my focus was on 1961 Topps. I could not understand how Herrera had a high-number Sporting News All-Star card but no regular issue card. Other than Musial in '58, I did not know of any other occasion when that occurred, and Musial's situation could be explained by contract issues with Rawlings or whoever that prevented Topps from using his image until they acquired the rights in '58, apparently too late to insert anything other than a high-number AS card (which they triple printed). I had never heard of Herrera, and wondered how he did not merit a regular card. He played the full 1960 season with better numbers than '61, and ended up playing 126 games in 1961, so Topps had plenty of opportunities when going to press to include him in the '61 set with a regular-issue card.

So I figured I'd learn a little more about the guy and his All-Star season from his 1962 Topps card. But guess what? He has none, and he has no Topps cards thereafter. He goes from being an All-Star to nothing! Frankly, I thought maybe he met a tragic end, so I looked him up, years ago and again just now. He went 35-108-.295 in Buffalo in 1962, so he was alive and well, but he did not play a single game in the bigs either that year or ever again. He had led the Phils in HR in 1961 and was second on the team in RBI, so I have no idea why he was demoted in the first place--instead the team went out and acquired a 35 year-old Roy Sievers to play for what ended up as a .500 club. He got shipped out of the organization after 1962, but hung around in the minors for years. I wonder if there was a scandalous story behind him, ala Ed Bouchee.

Nolemmings:

You inspired me to go on a research hunt. And trust the good ole SABR to provide the answers:

Herrera was of Cuban descent, and his contract was purchased by the Phillies from the Kansas City Monarchs of the Negro Leagues, making him the first black Latin player in the Majors. Though he was issued an All-Star card in '61, was actually quite the K artist, such that he was traded by Philly to the Pirates in November of '62 (along with Ted Savage, another not particularly notable--and decidedly nomadic--baseball career) in exchange for Don Hoak. He kicked around the Minors as part of the Pittsburgh and later Chicago White Sox orgs, and by the late 60's was in the Mexican League. Not long after he was done with baseball, and in later years he worked for CAC-Ramsay Health Plans and then United Airlines. He died in 2005 in Florida.

Not that any of this answers why his '60 Topps (and not his '58 or '59) is his rookie card. Still, it's always interesting to find out about these obscure pieces of baseball history.

That's why I love this hobby. '-)