Sign or No Sign (Cal Ripken Jr)

[kahuna23]

I have a unautographed Cal Ripken Jr rookie era game used bat (graded a PSA/DNA 8). He is coming to a nearby show in Nov. and I do not know if I should get it signed($250). What does everyone think?

Thanks for the advice,
Steve

[mr.miracle]

I would say no to that but ultimately it is up to you. Many members of the forum say that an auto on a gamer in general is unappealing to them. While I would not go that far, my concern is asking for a rookie era bat to be autographed some 25 years after the fact. While Cal's auto has not changed dramatically over the years there are still some differences between then and now and I would not want a recent auto on a 25 year old gamer. Just my thoughts.

On a related note, you might want to check the show he is signing at as many of his recent shows have said specifically that Cal will not sign any game used items. What show is that for?

Thanks

[kylehess10]

I have a unautographed Cal Ripken Jr rookie era game used bat (graded a PSA/DNA 8). He is coming to a nearby show in Nov. and I do not know if I should get it signed($250). What does everyone think?

Thanks for the advice,
Steve

I personally like to get game used signed but I'd have to say leave that one unsigned. A rookie-era bat of Ripken shouldn't be signed (that's just my opinion though)

[suave1477]

I personally like Game Used bat signed but I wouldn't get that particualr one signed unless you knew for sure you can get an inscription "Game Used Rookie Era" or something like that. Otherwise I wouldn't.

Also as the other member said Cal is getting finicky with signing Game Used items and there is a good chance he is no going to sign it anyway. You should check with the Promoter.

Is it the MAB show in New Jersey or Baltimore?

[sylbry]

If Ripken will sign it you may want to consider further down the road. If you do not get it signed now a) how much will it cost in the future if you decide to have it signed (remember Ted Williams and Mickey Mantle charged 4 figures to sign game bats later on in life) and b) will Cal stop signing game items all together. He seems to be going down that road.

My guess is that for every one person who would not like his rookie era bat signed there is one person who would love to have his rookie era bat signed.

[geoff]

That Baltimore show is in late January at the Convention center.Is he signing in Baltimore before that also.

[Oil Can Dan]

My personal preference is for game used bats or jerseys to be un-signed. As has been said, it's a personal preference decision.

Quick question and I don't intend to sidetrack the discussion on Cal, but what is the rationale for refusing to sign game-used items? Obviously there's no additional effort to sign a non-game-used bat over a game-used one, so why? I'm totally missing something...

[kahuna23]

Ripken is scheduled to be at the Sun Times show in Rosemont, IL Sunday Nov. 19th.

Thanks for the replies,
Steve

[Nathan]

Oil Can Dan,

The reason is because there is nothing to separate any mass-produced items (i.e. jerseys, hats). A signature makes a particular item somewhat unique.

When you're talking about a game-used item being signed, you're also talking about removing it from its original "final used state" condition dramatically. To me there are few things more unappealing than seeing a great item with ink smeared all over it, especially when it's an extremely tough item. There's a big-time hockey collector who has a sizable international hockey collection, but had a great deal of difficulty tracking down a Team Romania jersey. Finally one came available...with the kicker being that it had been signed by over 70 people.

To me, signing is no different than putting bleach on a well-worn gamer in order to make it "look cleaner", like someone who sold an old Rams (or maybe Cardinals) white jersey that showed bleach stains. Apparently the person bought the jersey and wanted to get the dirt and bloodstains out of it since they were unsightly.

A gamer will appeal to a lot more people unsigned than signed. Just something to keep in mind...primarily if you ever go to sell an item and a very interested buyer passes because he doesn't want the jersey or bat or whatever with an 8"x8" "To John's Dry Cleaners, Thanks for the speedy work on the suits, your friend Joe Blow" inscription.

[suave1477]

Nathan I could be wrong but I think Oil Can Do meant why do the players refuse to sign Game Used Items such as Cal Ripken. I believe and have heard this before because the player himself cannot always determine if it was really his Game Used bat or someone doctored up a Game Used bat. So instead of the hassle they rather not sign it, becaue they feel someone might try to pass it off as there Game Used bat since it has there autograph on it and it might not really be.

Nathan I also disagree with you on saying most people prefer the items not signed, I would say it's pretty even on both sides as I know people would rather the Game Used items signed because it personalizes the item that much more and some people don't like it at all feeling it takes away from the item.

It is pretty even on both sides of the fence.

I think my way of handling Game Used items signed is one of the best ways.
If the item itself has no real relevance to anything significant accomplished (example - Record Setting HR's, Record Setting RBI'S etc....) then having it signed to me adds to the item.

If the item has relevance to an accomplishment such as HR'S, Games Played, RBI'S etc...... then do not have it signed leave it in it's original state that it is in.
Unless the player himself at that moment when it happens signs it. Example - Steiner when Jose Reyes hit for the cycle they had Reyes give them his game used items and sign them at that moment - To me thats ok!!!

Just my opinion!!!

[stlbats]

This is just my opinion, but I do not see having bat or jersey signed, changes it dramatically from its game used state. I think it kind of adds authenticity to it, especially with an inscription of some kind. However, washing a jersey or any kind of doctoring at all, I do see as a major problem, but not any autograph. I have found that most items sell more often and higher if they are signed. I personally will not buy anything signed, but most people will.

Most all of the Mantle, Dimaggio, ect gamers have their later in life signatures on them and they sell for more than unsigned ones.

Not to get off the Ripken subject, I would say as stated above its pretty much up to the owner of the bat to have it signed. If it were mine, I might have it signed.

Jason

[icollectDCsports]

As for the Ripken bat, do what appeals to you most. It's your bat.

To me, adding a signature to a truly game used item adds nothing. There is no greater personalization than the player using the bat or wearing a jersey in actual games. That's why we desire game used items so much more than game issued.

As for signatures on game worn jerseys, anyone wanting to know my opinion on this, and the opinions of many others, should do a search and you'll see a number of threads on this topic.

[JETEFAN]

Get It Signed !!!! A Gamer Will Be A Gamer Whether It Is Signed Or Not. As For Value... Ruth, Gehrig, Cobb, Williams Etc. Would You Say An Autographed Bat Of Any Of These Guys Is Worth More Than An Unautographed One..... Absolutly !!!!! Would Anyone Here On The Forum Trade An Autographed One For One That Is Not ?

George

[mr.miracle]

Just to clarify, Cal Ripken will not sign anything with the inscription game used at any time regardless of the provence and where it came from. This came directly from IronClad Authentics several months ago. So getting anything written with the inscription game used by Cal is out.