PDA

View Full Version : Bat Grading Discussion



Nnunnari
04-04-2014, 12:33 PM
I think it is time to have a long overdue discussion about the elephant in the room of the bat hobby, John Taube and his grading scale. I would like to know the opinions of other collectors. How much longer do you think it will be acceptable and/or tolerated that one man's opinion essentially dictates the market value for game used bats?
John Taube is an incredibly knowledgeable person when it comes to game used bats. He is one of the true pioneers in bringing structure to the hobby through his authenticating and grading. My personal opinion however, is that the hobby has grown too big for one man too handle. The game used bat hobby has seen tremendous growth over the past decade and even more so over the past five years. John's ability to authenticate bats with access to shipping records was a game changer for the hobby. Prior to the Louisville records becoming public information, it was a complete guessing game as to what was authentic and what was not. Now that the records, for the most part, are public and the internet is what it is today, collectors are more educated than ever.


My problem is with the grading system and it's subjective nature. The PSA/DNA grading system is essentially one man's opinion of a bat as much as they want to argue that their process is as objective as possible. Sure there is Mears, but PSA/DNA is the industry standard. Why should the quality and therefore value of a bat be dictated by a single person?

Not only is John the one grading nearly 90% of the bats in the hobby, he is a buyer, seller and collector himself. If this is not a conflict of interest, I do not know what is.


Every major auction house these days will send bats to John for grading. His "opinion" has an incredible impact on that bat's market value. I'll provide one of many examples later.


John's true value is in the vintage bat market. If I own a vintage bat, John is the guy I would want assessing that bat since he has experience in the vintage market which few can match. When it comes to modern era bats, there are many collectors whose opinion I value just as much, if not more than John's.


The system is broken and needs to be fixed. My question is, when will the hobby speak up and finally do something about it? It seems as though everybody just accepts the severely flawed system for what it is and goes with it or they are too scared to speak their mind in fear of the repercussions their opinions may have when their pieces need to be graded.


One possibility is to use a panel of three "experts" who individually evaluate a bat and the average of their three grades is the number assigned. Obviously this system would provide challenges as well. Would there be enough business to pay three people's salaries? Logistically, I would imagine all three people would have to be in the same location so bats are not being shipped all over the country. The individuals, if at the same location, would have to privately assign their grade and not discuss among themselves what their opinions are.


I attached pics of two graded Tony Gwynn bats. One graded a GU 8.5 and sold in Goldin Auctions for roughly $550. The other bat graded a GU10 and sold in Goldin Auctions for roughly $2,350. Do these bats appear to be three grades apart from one another, if at all? The grades should be flip flopped in my opinion. Not to mention, the signature on the GU10 bat is highly suspect and did not pass PSA/DNA. This further proves how much value the hobby places on a "GU10". This is one of many examples where John's opinion significantly swung the value of a bat one direction or another.

Does paying $175-$300 for a modern era bat to be graded really make any sense? As evidence by the countless "clerical errors" and typos in John's letters, I truly believe he is completely overwhelmed.

I hope the forum moderators recognize this as a healthy discussion for the hobby and let the conversation run despite any business relationships they may have with PSA/DNA. I would love to hear other opinions and suggestions, especially those who are actively involved in higher end bat collecting.
http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z34/Nnunnari/GwynnGU85_zpsb1928825.jpeg (http://s195.photobucket.com/user/Nnunnari/media/GwynnGU85_zpsb1928825.jpeg.html)
http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z34/Nnunnari/GwynnGU10_zps66d40a05.jpeg (http://s195.photobucket.com/user/Nnunnari/media/GwynnGU10_zps66d40a05.jpeg.html)

vonbrandingo
04-04-2014, 01:40 PM
Great topic! I too saw the glaring conflict of interest when I first started collecting and learned of John's role at PSA and as a dealer of memorabilia, specifically bats. It was incredible to me but I accepted it and started to enjoy it when I began benefiting from it.

My question is whether bats with a PSA/DNA LOA would sell for as much if accompanied by a JT Sports LOA instead? And why doesn't John use a JT Sports LOA when selling through JT Sports? I have seen some of the older JT Sports LOAs, which from what I can remember, were issued to GF auctions. I do not hold those JT Sports letters in such high esteem as the PSA/DNA ones, which is very strange to me because it is the same person who signs them both.

yanks12025
04-04-2014, 02:19 PM
Grading bats is stupid.. Collectors having bats restored is stupid... Given restored bats higher grades is even more stupid... I believe in several years people will regret having some bats restored(I'm talking big name players like Ruth, Gehrig, Cobb, etc)

danesei@yahoo.com
04-04-2014, 02:28 PM
Well thought out post. That said, I have the following concerns:

1) How do you know the signature failed PSA? I mean, it's possible that the owner didn't see much value in getting the signature authenticated, since Gwynn signed bats sometimes sell for less than the authentication fees and shipping.

2) Doesn't the bottom bat have use markers noted like the tapedd knob and the pine tar application? Maybe the buying audience also wanted an uncracked bat?

I understand the frustration, and you're right that it would help for PSA to hire others for the bat authentication division. Maybe they could even delve into the nether world of authentication that used to be occupied by MEARS. Do you have suggestions of who could potentially be hired to focus more on modern bats?

I think that the problem is also partially addressed by the authentication process itself. Taube & Malta both seem to have been hired by Collector's Universe to develop a vintage game used bat authentication division. This is fairly clear in the write-ups about the service, as well as the focus of their articles. I think it was a good idea to hire two of the best at authenticating the old stuff. It also sort of coincided with the development of the MLB authentication program for current game used stuff. Since there is a gap between vintage and current of around 40 years, there's a lot to be desired, but it's still much better than where it was.

Again, if you can come up with names of persons who might be experts at identifying multiple modern (but not current) player characteristics, I'm sure JT and Joe Orlando would love to hear your suggestions.

As for the JT Sports LOA, that's a good question. I used to wonder the same thing myself. I guess that for non-hobby people, the PSA name carries more merit and a higher price tag, but I would assume JT also has more resources at his disposal now (with PSA) than he did when on his own. Of course, that's speculation on my part. For all we know, he might still be running operations in the same manner as he did pre-PSA.

Personally, I don't think there's a conflict of interest in JT buying/selling bats and authenticating them, since people trust him. Yes, there's the potential for a conflict, but I don't think one currently exists. While brash at times (at least his emails read that way), he dos try his best to respond to questions individuals may have for him when he has the time. Also, I don't mind JT selling his bats with PSA LOAs, since that removes the possibility of "double dipping" down the road. If he used JT Sports LOAs all the time, there'd be the risk that someone might submit the item for authentication to PSA later down the road (if they didn't understand who JT Sports is/was).

My curiosity is more about why VM's name still appears on the LOAs when he seemingly has no active role in the operations. (I thought I read somewhere that he's chosen to focus on real estate or something like that.)

PSA is an interesting situation. On the autograph side, they constantly are criticized for having shadow authenticators. It seems that on the GU bat side, they're at the other end of the spectrum, where the authenticator is well-known, but a single person.

I agree that there is a potential for disaster with the current system. Hopefully JT and VM are training the next generation of bat authenticators. Maybe some of those trainees are even members of this board. :)

pwnasaurus
04-04-2014, 03:03 PM
I don't pay attention to game used grades for anything. For cards that are mass produced, that's fine, but GU items are generally one of a kind (at least the vintage era stuff) and if it is good, it's good. If it has enough use for you, all original, etc whatever you deem a standard for owning it in your collection, then I don't understand why it would need a number grade. There are so many variables involved with each individual item that I solely judge them on their own merit rather than any number grade assigned to them. I think it's pretty obvious which item out of 2 has more use or has better provenance, etc as opposed to a card that you might not be able to spot less obvious flaws with. Number grades on GU items is something that started when I was away from the hobby and now that I'm back, it is generally confusing to me why one would put so much stock in them unless you are trying to build an entire lineup of PSA 10 1983 Orioles bats or something like the PSA set builders do.

tl/dr, if an item is good and it has the characteristics you seek as a collector, I don't see the appeal of a number grade being worth the heavy multiplier but I've always been fine with PSA 9 cards as well :)

onlyalbert
04-04-2014, 06:29 PM
Nick, fantastic topic for discussion! Past threads have touched on this topic and my input hopefully does not step on any toes. I love authentication of bats but put me down for a dislike on grading. And here's why.....grading a bat is only one persons opinion, and what is it based on really? Maybe John needs to develop and publish a strictly adhered to scale with parameters for each point,half point, or grade. That way everyone knows why a bat is assigned such a grade. I believe Mears does this and it's very helpful.

I say this based on my many years of research on Pujols bats. I'm a Cardinals guy so would not be able to speak on other teams players useage so John is to be commended, or his company, to be able to identify the many thousands of current and recent players. But I do feel I know Pujols, at least from his Cards days. His tar patterns, hitting surfaces, and autograph are distinct for each of his 11 years there. If there has been a Pujols bat sold at auction, on ebay, or here in the last 6 years....chances are I have seen it and researched it.

Although I have not catalogued these many many many dozens of examples I can say that there deffinitely have been errors made in authentication, and many have been discussed here. There have also been many questionable grades assigned, and those too have been discussed. And if anyone does not think a Pujols 10 would sell for more money or more quickly than say a 8.5 or 9 then they are sadly mistaken. It's because of this that I have never had a bat graded.....but have owned many. I've seen bats graded a 10 that never should have and 8s that could be 10s and that is a shame because the difference in price would be many hundreds of dollars. Some people will only collect uncracked bats.....some only PSA 10s. So they won't even look at your bat in some instances and that is a shame. I feel it's too much weight given to something so opinion generated.

Would love to hear others thoughts on a grading scale.

justrun7
04-04-2014, 06:32 PM
PSA does have a set standard scale for bat grading according to their website, incase anyone is interested.

http://www.psacard.com/Services/BatGradingStandards

Nnunnari
04-04-2014, 06:53 PM
PSA does have a set standard scale for bat grading according to their website, incase anyone is interested.

http://www.psacard.com/Services/BatGradingStandards

Please explain the difference between the 10 and 8.5 in my example judging by the scale you posted.
It is 100% subjective.

GameBats
04-04-2014, 06:58 PM
The hobby has spoken up, that's the reason the major auction houses utilize PSA/John Taube authentication and grading services and bidders are willing to pay a premium. He's second to none. I don't agree "the system is broken and needs to be fixed". If/when someone is willing to dedicate the time and effort to authenticating and grading bats with the knowledge and integrity of John Taube the system will welcome them with open arms. I don't feel the system is preventing anyone from breaking through the glass ceiling of bat authentication. It takes years of hard work and credibility.

onlyalbert
04-04-2014, 07:01 PM
According to their site a PSA 10 must "show signs of medium to heavy use". There is a Pujols at auction now with "light" use graded a 10.

onlyalbert
04-04-2014, 07:05 PM
According to their site a PSA 10 must "show signs of medium to heavy use". There is a Pujols at auction now with "light" use graded a 10.

Actually, after reading further about their scale, this bat should fall into 6, 6.5, or 7 at best as it's usage is graded "light". What would that bat be worth with that grade?

justrun7
04-04-2014, 07:11 PM
Please explain the difference between the 10 and 8.5 in my example judging by the scale you posted.
It is 100% subjective.

"In cases where documentation is not included, if a bat possesses perfect player characteristics, exhibits medium to heavy use and satisfies all other criteria to achieve a grade of PSA/DNA GU 10, the authenticator, at his discretion, may award the highest grade. Under these circumstances, the bat must be exceptional on its own merit, absent documentation." (Italics added for emphasis)

PSA gives warning that the grade is subjective to the grader. I doubt that helps, but it just seemed like people were saying PSA has a blind grading system.

onlyalbert
04-04-2014, 07:19 PM
"In cases where documentation is not included, if a bat possesses perfect player characteristics, exhibits medium to heavy use and satisfies all other criteria to achieve a grade of PSA/DNA GU 10, the authenticator, at his discretion, may award the highest grade. Under these circumstances, the bat must be exceptional on its own merit, absent documentation." (Italics added for emphasis)

PSA gives warning that the grade is subjective to the grader. I doubt that helps, but it just seemed like people were saying PSA has a blind grading system.

Maybe it would be helpful if the terms light, medium, and heavy were defined as well as the characteristics for the player being graded.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-04-2014, 07:19 PM
Please explain the difference between the 10 and 8.5 in my example judging by the scale you posted.
It is 100% subjective.

The 10 was photo-matched.

http://goldinauctions.com/lot-7214.aspx

I'm pretty sure that was a significant driving force in the hammer price for the auction. Yes, your bat may have more use, but it's hard to argue against a 10 when the bat is in the hands of the player.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-04-2014, 07:21 PM
The 10 was photo-matched.

http://goldinauctions.com/lot-7214.aspx

I'm pretty sure that was a significant driving force in the hammer price for the auction. Yes, your bat may have more use, but it's hard to argue against a 10 when the bat is in the hands of the player.

On a side note, I'm not even sure the bat in the photo is the actual bat that was sold, since the 10 is absent the black donut rings, but I'm not sure people bidding noticed that.

onlyalbert
04-04-2014, 07:25 PM
The 10 was photo-matched.

http://goldinauctions.com/lot-7214.aspx

I'm pretty sure that was a significant driving force in the hammer price for the auction. Yes, your bat may have more use, but it's hard to argue against a 10 when the bat is in the hands of the player.

Where does it say the Gwynn bat is photomatched? Not to that picture on the listing.....where's the tape?

And a photomatch does not automatically get a 10 if the use is "light" it can get no higher than a 7, correct?

Nnunnari
04-04-2014, 07:32 PM
Not even close to phomatched bud, no tape on the bat Tony is holding.

The hobby has spoken? Auction houses use PSA to maximize their profits and give a bat the perception of enhanced credibility. There is so much "new blood" to the hobby these days that more and more people are relying heavily on third party authentication. These new people do not have the experience and have not done years of homework that others have.
I respect your opinion but having one person as the voice of reason for the entire hobby just does not make any sense.
When John's opinion is accepted as absolute fact by buyers in the market, there needs to be significantly much more consistency and attention to detail in his work. No accountability up to this point whatsoever.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-04-2014, 07:43 PM
Where does it say the Gwynn bat is photomatched? Not to that picture on the listing.....where's the tape?

And a photomatch does not automatically get a 10 if the use is "light" it can get no higher than a 7, correct?

I already indicated that I didn't think the bat is matched to the photo, but the bidders that Goldin attracts are generally fans of the game who'd love to have some attachment to their heroes. They aren't collectors/hobbyists who know much about how things are identified. That said, to the casual observer, seeing the picture would imply a photomatch.

As for the question about the grading...

10:

"In order to achieve the PSA/DNA GU 10 grade, a Professional Model Bat must be fully documented or possess extraordinary player characteristics, match available factory records and exhibit medium to heavy use."

9:

"A PSA/DNA GU 9 bat is one that exhibits very similar qualities to a PSA/DNA GU 10 bat. The bat in question must match available factory records, possess identifiable player characteristics and exhibit medium to heavy use."

8:

"A PSA/DNA GU 8 bat must match available factory records, possess identifiable player characteristics and exhibit at least medium use."

7:

"A PSA/DNA GU 7 bat must match available factory records, possess identifiable player characteristics and exhibit light to medium use."

6:

"A PSA/DNA GU 6 bat must match available factory records, possess identifiable player characteristics and exhibit at least light use."

Based upon use alone, that gives a range of:

0-5: No use attributable to player.
6-7: Light use attributable to player.
7-10: Medium (or higher) use attributable to player.

It seems possible that a bat with heavy use could grade anywhere from a 6-10, but higher than an 8 would be most likely.

If a bat had light use, the highest grade it would get is a 7, but both bats shown exhibit at least medium use, which seems to be the only use qualifier to reach a 10. Characteristics and provenance seem to have an impact on getting a 10, even though the definition for 10 seems to imply that it doesn't.

vonbrandingo
04-05-2014, 05:20 AM
"What if this is as good as it gets?"

Lunytune2
04-05-2014, 06:26 AM
Just like coin collecting and baseball card collecting ... they take the fun out of a hobby by assigning grades to things ... This way it is not "Look how cool my item is" it is "Look how much my item is worth "

GoTigers
04-05-2014, 08:32 AM
Is grading for authentication or eye appeal? I don't think a MLB auth or photomatched bat even with light use should grade lower than an example with heavy use and is not photomatched or mlb auth.

R. C. Walker
04-05-2014, 02:50 PM
Just like coin collecting and baseball card collecting ... they take the fun out of a hobby by assigning grades to things ... This way it is not "Look how cool my item is" it is "Look how much my item is worth "

You are so correct It's not about authenticating nor a subjective grading system. It's all about maximizing a perceived premium dollar amount due to a supposed "Expert Opinion".

Do you really need to have someone else give you a definition of Light, Medium or Heavy use?

Also, factory records. I know of Louisville Slugger factory records. Who knows of or has access to records for Adirondak, Rawlings, Trinity, Murrucci, Chandler and the myriad of other bat manufacturers? Does that mean no 10's for those bats?

I believe collectors know about a particular players bat characteristics and definitely know the definition of light, medium or heavy use just as much if not more than an expert. Collectors educate themselves regarding the hobby. Speculators need an outside source for validation. The only person who ends out on top is the person you gave $$$ to give their opinion..

danesei@yahoo.com
04-05-2014, 03:06 PM
Just like coin collecting and baseball card collecting ... they take the fun out of a hobby by assigning grades to things ...

Coin collecting has had grading since well before the current Sheldon scale was used. I'm fairly certain that everyone alive today never collected coins in an environment where a grading system didn't exist. I would assume the same is true about sports cards, but I can't be positive. On coins, I'm sure.

Nnunnari
04-05-2014, 03:33 PM
Coin collecting has had grading since well before the current Sheldon scale was used. I'm fairly certain that everyone alive today never collected coins in an environment where a grading system didn't exist. I would assume the same is true about sports cards, but I can't be positive. On coins, I'm sure.

Seriously?
Danesei, I appreciate you chiming in but I am more interested in hearing opinions of respected bat collectors, i.e. Jason, Jimmy and R.C. We don't need an off topic response to every post.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-05-2014, 04:43 PM
Seriously?
Danesei, I appreciate you chiming in but I am more interested in hearing opinions of respected bat collectors, i.e. Jason, Jimmy and R.C. We don't need an off topic response to every post.

I haven't made an off-topic response to every post. In fact, I think the response is quite relevant, unlike the comment that I was responding to. Grading systems aren't only about resale value. They also protect new collectors who aren't quite aware of what creates good value. Knowledge is gained (generally) from two sources: Experience (collecting your mistakes, as Vince Malta would say) and education (studying what others have written on the subject or learning directly from experts). Much like paying an accountant or a financial advisor for things that you could do on your own, collectors who simply don't have knowledge pay a premium for expertise.

I agree (as I've said before) that there is a need for additional experts in the field to step up and work with PSA so there isn't a problem, should something happen to Taube. However, I completely disagree with arguments against having a grading system of some sort. Maybe the current system isn't perfect (or even close), but it's what we have. Unless someone comes up with a better system that can be actively implemented, I think that what Taube and Malta do with PSA is better than nothing. Yes, it would be wonderful if
there were more graders (and we don't really know with certainty that there aren't), but having one grader who most collectors trust is better than having dubious sellers controlling the market.

Birdbats
04-05-2014, 09:03 PM
Grading is a wonderful thing for cards and coins because the only perspective considered is aesthetics. There is a standard system for "point deductions" based on flaws -- centering, corner sharpness, printing registration, gloss, etc. But, bats are a completely different animal because the grade goes beyond aesthetics to include authenticity based on use characteristics.

It's like having a contest where people are judged on their singing AND cooking skills. You can judge singing, you can judge cooking (both subjectively, of course)... but combining the two creates an odd competition. To me, it's even worse with bats because there is inherent conflict between aesthetics and use. For example, an older Adirondack bat can be docked points for flaked foil stamping -- but if the loss of markings is the result of heavy use, is it really a flaw? Or, there's the McGwire example, where we know (at least during his Cardinals days) that he stopped using bats for essentially one of two reasons -- it couldn't be used anymore (crack or deadwood), or he signed it and gave it to an acquaintance or museum. To me, a cracked McGwire Cardinals bat should grade higher than an uncracked bat because there's a higher likelihood he actually used it. But, with a generic scale that adds aesthetics to the equation, a cracked Mac bat loses points for the crack.

I think there would be value in grading if it was limited to authenticity/use characteristics. However, to be truly useful, grading would need to be akin to judging dogs at Westminster -- each example would need to be graded according to the "ideal" for its breed. For one player, an ideal bat could be lightly used because that player has a tendency to go through many bats and prefers new wood. For another player, it might require heavy use and tar. Or handle tape or scoring. Or ball marks in a particular location. Or cleat marks on the barrel. Or a uniform number written in a certain way. Such a system would require many experts because no one person could possibly determine the "standard" for every player.

Even that kind of system could be controversial. Consider the photo-matched bat with MLB hologram that cracks before it can acquire the player's typical use characteristics (heavy tar, excessive ball marks). Would such a well-documented bat deserve to grade lower than an undocumented bat with perfect use characteristics? Using the dog show analogy, is it fair to say, "Well, it certainly is a real beagle, but it's not an ideal beagle" and, therefore, grade it lower?

As for aesthetics, the reality is some collectors like cracks and some don't. Some like restored and some don't. Some like light use and some like heavy. This isn't like coins, where I can't imagine there's a huge subset of collectors who want heavy wear and nicks because it proves the coin was "used." The value of a game-used bat, as influence by a grade, should be determined by the likelihood it actually was used by the player in question and whether it possesses the ideal use characteristics. Beyond that, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You could have bats graded 10 that are cracked or uncracked and different collectors will value them in different ways.

Lunytune2
04-05-2014, 09:20 PM
Grading is a wonderful thing for cards and coins because the only perspective considered is aesthetics. There is a standard system for "point deductions" based on flaws -- centering, corner sharpness, printing registration, gloss, etc. But, bats are a completely different animal because the grade goes beyond aesthetics to include authenticity based on use characteristics.

It's like having a contest where people are judged on their singing AND cooking skills. You can judge singing, you can judge cooking (both subjectively, of course)... but combining the two creates an odd competition. To me, it's even worse with bats because there is inherent conflict between aesthetics and use. For example, an older Adirondack bat can be docked points for flaked foil stamping -- but if the loss of markings is the result of heavy use, is it really a flaw? Or, there's the McGwire example, where we know (at least during his Cardinals days) that he stopped using bats for essentially one of two reasons -- it couldn't be used anymore (crack or deadwood), or he signed it and gave it to an acquaintance or museum. To me, a cracked McGwire Cardinals bat should grade higher than an uncracked bat because there's a higher likelihood he actually used it. But, with a generic scale that adds aesthetics to the equation, a cracked Mac bat loses points for the crack.

I think there would be value in grading if it was limited to authenticity/use characteristics. However, to be truly useful, grading would need to be akin to judging dogs at Westminster -- each example would need to be graded according to the "ideal" for its breed. For one player, an ideal bat could be lightly used because that player has a tendency to go through many bats and prefers new wood. For another player, it might require heavy use and tar. Or handle tape or scoring. Or ball marks in a particular location. Or cleat marks on the barrel. Or a uniform number written in a certain way. Such a system would require many experts because no one person could possibly determine the "standard" for every player.

Even that kind of system could be controversial. Consider the photo-matched bat with MLB hologram that cracks before it can acquire the player's typical use characteristics (heavy tar, excessive ball marks). Would such a well-documented bat deserve to grade lower than an undocumented bat with perfect use characteristics? Using the dog show analogy, is it fair to say, "Well, it certainly is a real beagle, but it's not an ideal beagle" and, therefore, grade it lower?

As for aesthetics, the reality is some collectors like cracks and some don't. Some like restored and some don't. Some like light use and some like heavy. This isn't like coins, where I can't imagine there's a huge subset of collectors who want heavy wear and nicks because it proves the coin was "used." The value of a game-used bat, as influence by a grade, should be determined by the likelihood it actually was used by the player in question and whether it possesses the ideal use characteristics. Beyond that, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You could have bats graded 10 that are cracked or uncracked and different collectors will value them in different ways.

Grading is a good thing ... but how is a bat graded ... in coins and baseball cards it is the pristine condition (which I believe there is no 10 baseball card or ms70 coin .... mass production is NEVER perfect) ... a perfect unused bat is essentally worthless in my opinion , and how would a beat up heavily used bat get a "10" ... because someone said so who is an expert .... so a $150 bat is now a $500 bat ?????? REALLY !

Lunytune2
04-05-2014, 09:25 PM
Bat grading sounds more like authenticating to me ... someone just thought it needed a number scale instead of just a genuine :confused:

Nnunnari
04-05-2014, 10:30 PM
Excellent post Jeff, thanks for sharing.

To one of your points, most players will naturally use their favorite gamers until it breaks. Docking a bat a half point for a crack (unless it's a severe crack) is asinine in my eyes.

gingi79
04-05-2014, 10:32 PM
Bat grading sounds more like authenticating to me ... someone just thought it needed a number scale instead of just a genuine :confused:

I agree. I always saw Comic Book grading and Card grading as logical. Like BirdBats said, look at the aesthetic, how it matches perfect printing, centering, colors, etc.

Game used stuff is intrenched in one of two camps. Real and Bogus. Using a grading scale is like saying "This is a photomatched example of one bat used by a player in one at bat during a 15 year career. Grade 10." Any deviations require a demerit of "X" points.

Even with a length and breadth of knowledge like John, mistakes are made. Not intentional, but it does happen. I'm not advocating he needs additional authenticators as much as eliminating this nonsense grading scale. Stuff is real or it isn't. Logically, that should be the one and only grade assigned to game used items. But it will never happen.

A 5.0 from MEARS or John or anyone means they are 50 percent sure this is the real deal. Even a 6.5 is only a 65% approval rating. Try suing someone whose opinion is there is only a 65% chance this is what it is proported to be.

Never forget, people put a premium on MeiGray items because they stand behind their stuff. Forever. No grades, no conjecture, prove it's fake 25 years from now....full refund.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-05-2014, 11:34 PM
Never forget, people put a premium on MeiGray items because they stand behind their stuff. Forever. No grades, no conjecture, prove it's fake 25 years from now....full refund.

But, isn't MeiGray like MLB Authenticated for the NBA/NHL? I mean, don't they just sell the items for the NBA/NHL? As such, I'm not sure how you would prove the items to not be what they're stated to be. That said, does MLB offer a similar refund option with their items? Also, does MeiGray guarantee the items beyond the first party to purchase from them?

Nnunnari
04-07-2014, 10:35 AM
Danasei, the thread killer.

rdeversole
04-07-2014, 02:24 PM
Danasei, the thread killer.

+1

danesei@yahoo.com
04-07-2014, 07:54 PM
Danasei, the thread killer.

Thanks. Though, I'm not sure I'd call a thread dead that's only three days old.

Anyway, here's the LOA portion of the GU10, for comparison sake. Again, I don't understand where you got the information that the signature was deemed not good by PSA. Sorry for the image size, I don't know how to change the scale.

http://goldinauctions.com/ItemImages/000007/7214g_lg.jpeg

gingi79
04-07-2014, 07:59 PM
Also, does MeiGray guarantee the items beyond the first party to purchase from them?


Yes, MeiGray stands behind their stuff, forever. Purchase it from them or be the 34th person to own the shirt.

They are (sadly) not utilized by every team in the NHL but rather have about a half dozen partner teams. Additionally, they have a Vintage division and MeiGray Select which are some of the most incredible jerseys in the hobby.

Also worth mentioning, they know every jersey worn by their partner team for the season with a publicly accessible Population Report detailing set dates. Unlike other dealers and teams I could mention which seem to have players wearing 20+ jerseys per season and no such detailed accounting.

Oh and their is no "grade" or hedging on their jerseys, sticks, pucks, helmets etc. There is only "Yes" and it's Registered or "No" we cannot confirm this is 100% authentic and it isn't registered with them.

vonbrandingo
04-07-2014, 08:29 PM
danesei, PSA said they were unable to authenticate the signature. May not mean it's fake I guess, but it is questionable at best. I've seen a few Gwynn signatures and can't remember one that looks like this from any point in his career.

http://www.goldinauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid=7214

Roady
04-07-2014, 08:30 PM
Two points I would like to make.
Number 1. I don't care what anyone says a bat is "graded" at. I see a bat I like then I buy it. Grading bats is about as dumb to me as milking a bull.
I see bats in four categories.
1 - No use
2 - light use
3 - moderate use
4 - heavy use
I don't need anyone else to tell me what my eyes can see.

Number 2. MeiGray's lifetime guarantee is only as good as they are in business or they decide to change it. There is no 100% lifetime guarantee that you can count on. That guarantee is at the desecration of the company.
Not saying anything negative about MieGray.

R. C. Walker
04-07-2014, 10:45 PM
To all the bat collectors/experts out there, whether you agree or disagree with bat grading, what are your opinions regarding the bat grading standards set forth by PSA:

PSA/DNA GU4 - GU10
 States, “The bat in question must match available factory records . . .
“Once again I ask: Outside of Louisville Slugger does anyone have access to historical factory records for say Andirondak or Worth? How about data from the numerous current manufacturers? If not, theoretically no other bat other than LS may receive a grade higher than GU3.

BUT

PSA/DNA GU10 Reads, “In cases where documentation is not included, if a bat possesses perfect player characteristics, exhibits medium to heavy use and satisfies all other criteria to achieve a grade of PSA/DNA GU 10, the authenticator, at his discretion, may award the highest grade.
Is the “discretion” influenced by whom they are hired by? Auction House or Pedestrian Collector. Could that be the difference between the Gwynn bats, Nick?

And Finally: PSA/DNA GU 6 - GU10
 “. . . minor repairs may be acceptable.”
Really? You can get a “10” for a bat with minor repairs? I’m going to get some wood putty to fill in those Batboy nails on a Winfield I have and repair some restored foil stamping (Not really).

I agree with Roady on all his points & Jeff Scott, who has helped me way, way back. Grading is just too too subjective.

R. C. Walker
04-07-2014, 10:55 PM
Grading systems aren't only about resale value. They also protect new collectors who aren't quite aware of what creates good value. Knowledge is gained (generally) from two sources: Experience (collecting your mistakes, as Vince Malta would say) and education (studying what others have written on the subject or learning directly from experts).

Interesting article about protection.

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=28770#more-28770

esquiresports
04-07-2014, 11:51 PM
You guys might be interested to know that sometimes PSA does split the authentication and grading processes. For example, with unopened material, Steve Hart of BBCE authenticates all unopened product. A different group of people grade the unopened material. Perhaps this is an ideal solution, or at least a step forward, for the concerns expressed by many here. Taube can authenticate - his true speciality - and another group can grade - more of a formulaic exercise.

Nnunnari
04-08-2014, 12:12 AM
Great article, thanks for sharing R.C.

Regarding this comment:
Is the “discretion” influenced by whom they are hired by? Auction House or Pedestrian Collector. Could that be the difference between the Gwynn bats, Nick?

The word "discretion" basically admits that grading is done subjectively in most instances. Especially since most bats do not come with rock solid provenance, it's an educated guessing game.
Many collectors obviously believe that "friends of the house" will reap the benefits of any bat teetering between grades. Whereas a pedestrian collector will almost always receive the lower grade as to not flood the market with too many high-grade examples.

In John's defense, the GU8.5 was submitted by Goldin which makes it even more shocking that the grade was so low. I do not know who originally submitted the GU10. The main issue are the dates of which the grades were assigned. The GU10 in '06 and the GU8.5 in '13. The grading scale has obviously changed over the years. When John began grading bats (I believe '06?) his grading scale was much more lenient, he had not seen as many bats at that point of his career. As grading has become much more prevalent among collectors and sellers, he has tightened his grading scale. He has seen many more bats and therefore many more quality examples. This is only natural. I truly believe there are 10's out there from '06 that would grade as low as an 8 today. This is a problem since collectors value a 10 from '06 just as much as a 10 from '14. If there was a change to John's grading scale, which I believe there was, there should have been a formal announcement.
One example, I brought John my Paul Molitor bat to authenticate during the National in Anaheim in '06. He told me it was one of the nicest Molitors he had ever seen. There is no doubt in my mind that if I had the bat graded at that time, it would have graded a 10. I finally decided to have the bat graded last year, having remembered what he said (and agreeing with him) only to receive a 9. It's hard to imagine there are Molitor bats two grades higher than this one. The re-sale value of this bat was negatively affected by one man's opinion of it's quality.
http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z34/Nnunnari/MolitorCooper.jpg (http://s195.photobucket.com/user/Nnunnari/media/MolitorCooper.jpg.html)

Nnunnari
04-08-2014, 12:19 AM
You guys might be interested to know that sometimes PSA does split the authentication and grading processes. For example, with unopened material, Steve Hart of BBCE authenticates all unopened product. A different group of people grade the unopened material. Perhaps this is an ideal solution, or at least a step forward, for the concerns expressed by many here. Taube can authenticate - his true speciality - and another group can grade - more of a formulaic exercise.

Excellent comment Scott. The grading should be left to someone without a vested interest in the outcome.

If John has a player "X" GU10 up for sale on his website, does he want another GU10 of same player going to auction? Maybe it helps, maybe it hurts.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-08-2014, 04:39 AM
danesei, PSA said they were unable to authenticate the signature. May not mean it's fake I guess, but it is questionable at best. I've seen a few Gwynn signatures and can't remember one that looks like this from any point in his career.

http://www.goldinauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid=7214

That statement means that John Taube's division of PSA (the NJ office) can't authenticate the signature, since they don't do that. If you look at any signed bat that isn't previously authenticated by PSADNA (the CA office), the LOA will state that or something similar.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-08-2014, 04:49 AM
PSA/DNA GU4 - GU10
 States, “The bat in question must match available factory records . . .
“Once again I ask: Outside of Louisville Slugger does anyone have access to historical factory records for say Andirondak or Worth? How about data from the numerous current manufacturers? If not, theoretically no other bat other than LS may receive a grade higher than GU3.

I believe the problem is what you define as available. Adirondack does have factory records of what weights/lengths/models of bats were ordered by players. They may not be available to the public, as is the case with H&B (thanks to Malta's research and book), but they exist to at least the 50s.

That means that available factory records for Adirondack (I can't speak re: Worth/Wilson/Spalding/etc) might not be as exact (dates of production, number ordered, etc) as H&B, but they do exist.

As an example, Willie Mays ordered M63 35" 33 oz bats from Adirondack during his playing days, according to factory records. If a bat was submitted that fit into those specifications, had Mays player characteristics, and showed medium-heavy usage, that bat would be eligible for a grade of GU7 or higher. I don't see how one would interpret the factory record requirement to mean every company must keep records in the same fashion/system as H&B did for the Louisville Slugger bats.

vonbrandingo
04-08-2014, 09:01 AM
That statement means that John Taube's division of PSA (the NJ office) can't authenticate the signature, since they don't do that. If you look at any signed bat that isn't previously authenticated by PSADNA (the CA office), the LOA will state that or something similar.

Ok bud.

Game Used Bats
04-08-2014, 10:35 AM
Nick,

Are either of the Gwynn bats yours from the original post? Also, on thesecond bat, presumably the one graded a 10, where is the back side of the LOA that gives description? I'm not exactly sure what your argument is, but perhapsyou would be better served laying out the facts pertaining to usecharacteristics of Gwynn and why one is better than the other.

I am no trying to attack you in any way, shape, or form, but this all stinks of sour grapes. Posting here chipping away at people that have only added valueto the hobby, yet you haven't added value to your own post is irresponsible.If someone visiting this forum for the first time reads your post, they take absolutely nothing informative away from their experience here.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-09-2014, 02:34 AM
Ok bud.

This is a very condescending response to what I feel is a valid explanation. Nowhere on the LOA for the GU10 does it say the signature isn't authentic. The auction says PSA/DNA wasn't able to authenticate the signature. Based upon other LOAs (even the GU8.5 bat has the autograph clause), Taube adds a qualifier that the grade/opinion is not for the signature, since they're unable to authenticate the signature. My assumption (perhaps incorrect) was that Goldin Auctions asked Taube about the signature, and he said they don't authenticate those. I made the assumption on the LOAs that say the same thing whenever the bat wasn't first submitted to PSA/DNA's California office for autograph authentication.

vonbrandingo
04-09-2014, 08:48 AM
This is a very condescending response to what I feel is a valid explanation. Nowhere on the LOA for the GU10 does it say the signature isn't authentic. The auction says PSA/DNA wasn't able to authenticate the signature. Based upon other LOAs (even the GU8.5 bat has the autograph clause), Taube adds a qualifier that the grade/opinion is not for the signature, since they're unable to authenticate the signature. My assumption (perhaps incorrect) was that Goldin Auctions asked Taube about the signature, and he said they don't authenticate those. I made the assumption on the LOAs that say the same thing whenever the bat wasn't first submitted to PSA/DNA's California office for autograph authentication.

You might be right, but the wording that PSA could not authenticate the signature is different than how it's stated in Taube's LOA and implies that they couldn't authenticate it because it's inconsistent with exemplars. If the signature wasn't presented to PSA for authentication, Goldin would have said the auto hasn't been presented to PSA or other third party for authentication.

esquiresports
04-09-2014, 02:31 PM
Nick,

Are either of the Gwynn bats yours from the original post? Also, on thesecond bat, presumably the one graded a 10, where is the back side of the LOA that gives description? I'm not exactly sure what your argument is, but perhapsyou would be better served laying out the facts pertaining to usecharacteristics of Gwynn and why one is better than the other.

I am no trying to attack you in any way, shape, or form, but this all stinks of sour grapes. Posting here chipping away at people that have only added valueto the hobby, yet you haven't added value to your own post is irresponsible.If someone visiting this forum for the first time reads your post, they take absolutely nothing informative away from their experience here.

I think Nick was using examples to question whether assigning grades to a bat should be eliminated, whether or not grading is applied consistently, and whether there are actual or perceived conflicts of interest/biased in grading.

I believe this discussion could get PSA to look at whether an independent group should be doing the grading, as it uses for packs, since their pack authenticator also sells packs. Everyone I know is fine with this arrangement.

I believe the market will determine what value, if any, to assign to bat grades the same way it has with cards. A lot of people hate the grading "game," and I understand that. That's why people often retort "buy the card, not the flip (the label with the grade)."

The grading dilemma cuts both ways. It stinks to be a seller of an undergraded bat, but provides some nice opportunities as a buyer. Hopefully they cancel each other out.

One final note - PSA will review graded cards to determine (for a fee) if they are worthy of a bump in grade. There are several eagle-eyed collectors I know who have done very well purchasing high end 8s and 9s that they have gotten bumped to 9s and 10s upon review. I wouldn't hesitate to try the same approach with Taube, although I understand there are cost considerations.

esquiresports
04-09-2014, 02:36 PM
One more thing, PSA/DNA does authenticate signatures. "Could not" authenticate" means it was reviewed, as opposed to "did not authenticate." PSA will not say a signature is fake, only that they are unable to authenticate. Anyone familiar with Gwynn's signature can see why PSA could not authenticate that signature.

Nnunnari
04-09-2014, 03:27 PM
Nick,

Are either of the Gwynn bats yours from the original post? Also, on thesecond bat, presumably the one graded a 10, where is the back side of the LOA that gives description? I'm not exactly sure what your argument is, but perhapsyou would be better served laying out the facts pertaining to usecharacteristics of Gwynn and why one is better than the other.

I am no trying to attack you in any way, shape, or form, but this all stinks of sour grapes. Posting here chipping away at people that have only added valueto the hobby, yet you haven't added value to your own post is irresponsible.If someone visiting this forum for the first time reads your post, they take absolutely nothing informative away from their experience here.

I apologize, I don't know who you are based on your username.
I completely understand how this entire thread could come off as me just stomping my feet and crying about grades I disagree with. I want to make it clear that that is not the point of of this thread whatsoever. I am using examples I can best vouch for since I have held the bats in my hand. I truly want to get a discussion going among bat collectors as I believe there are issues with the current grading system. I have felt this way for years and have kept my mouth shut for the most part. When I hear from many friends in the hobby who agree with me, I feel like it is worth bringing to a public forum for debate. The problem is, most people do not feel comfortable chiming in on a public forum for many reasons and I don't blame them. John's a nice guy and if you are a bat collector, you're going to want to keep a positive relationship with John. So people bite their tongue, accept it for what it is and move on with their lives. Nothing will every change unfortunately taking that approach.

As far as your questions about the difference in the two Gwynn examples. There's no need to go into detail but one bat is clearly nicer than the other.

"Posting here chipping away at people that have only added value to the hobby, yet you haven't added value to your own post is irresponsible."
I'm going to have to disagree that JT has "only added value". I can show you examples of him selling/authenticating bats that were nowhere close to authentic. I am not sure what exactly you are looking for from me to "add value". I gave a suggestion about alternative ways to grade an item as have other members.
I think I have also pointed out how the grading scale has changed over the years as well as the blatant conflict of interests involved when one man, who is a collector, buyer and seller himself is in charge of grading. If you are looking for me to give specific details about use characteristics and what a grader should be looking for while grading a bat, that's not the point of the thread.

How about this example. Let's say John owns the nicest Joe DiMaggio in existence, the highest graded one. You happen to be lucky enough to acquire a fantastic DiMaggio that is new to the hobby. Do you want John grading the bat?
John's a great guy, he would never have ulterior motives when assigning grades right? I truly believe John is a great, honest guy and would be as honest as possible. But isn't it human nature to have these other thoughts creep into your mind? What are the surrounding circumstances with this grade, who sent it to me, was it a friend? If I grade this bat a 10, what happens to the value of mine or the value of my good buddy's who has been giving me solid business for 10 years. Just things to think about.

R. C. Walker
04-09-2014, 10:08 PM
I believe the problem is what you define as available. Adirondack does have factory records of what weights/lengths/models of bats were ordered by players. They may not be available to the public, as is the case with H&B (thanks to Malta's research and book), but they exist to at least the 50s.

That means that available factory records for Adirondack (I can't speak re: Worth/Wilson/Spalding/etc) might not be as exact (dates of production, number ordered, etc) as H&B, but they do exist.

As an example, Willie Mays ordered M63 35" 33 oz bats from Adirondack during his playing days, according to factory records. If a bat was submitted that fit into those specifications, had Mays player characteristics, and showed medium-heavy usage, that bat would be eligible for a grade of GU7 or higher. I don't see how one would interpret the factory record requirement to mean every company must keep records in the same fashion/system as H&B did for the Louisville Slugger bats.

For grading purposes, a 10 should match factory records from any manufacturer. Obviously those records would have to be “available” to PSA. Otherwise, it’s not a perfect bat in every aspect with full documentation. Just my opinion.

I don’t know where you got the idea that I interpreted that the factory record requirement meant every company must keep records in the same fashion/system as H&B bats.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-10-2014, 02:27 AM
“Once again I ask: Outside of Louisville Slugger does anyone have access to historical factory records for say Andirondak or Worth? How about data from the numerous current manufacturers? If not, theoretically no other bat other than LS may receive a grade higher than GU3.


For grading purposes, a 10 should match factory records from any manufacturer. Obviously those records would have to be “available” to PSA. Otherwise, it’s not a perfect bat in every aspect with full documentation. Just my opinion.

I don’t know where you got the idea that I interpreted that the factory record requirement meant every company must keep records in the same fashion/system as H&B bats.

The response I posted was based upon the premise you initially posited about Adirondack factory records being unavailable for the purposes of grading a bat as GU 10. My point was that, while H&B records included the bat orders by year, model, size, weight, and size of order, that wouldn't preclude an Adirondack bat from being eligible for a "10" grade. As I stated before, I can't speak to the records being available for bat manufacturers who are defunct, but Rawlings kept some of the Pro bat employees at the Adirondack factory, who are privy to the factory records of previous (McLaughlin) incarnations of Adirondack, on staff. The existence of these individuals, and their shop records would constitute manufacturers records. As such, I'm positing that Adirondack should be removed from the list of manufacturers who Taube/Malta wouldn't have ready access to records.


One more thing, PSA/DNA does authenticate signatures. "Could not" authenticate" means it was reviewed, as opposed to "did not authenticate." PSA will not say a signature is fake, only that they are unable to authenticate. Anyone familiar with Gwynn's signature can see why PSA could not authenticate that signature.

PSA/DNA does authenticate signatures. I never said they didn't. I said that the NJ office, which does the bat authentications doesn't authenticate autographs. That is why GU bats that haven't been previously authenticated for their signature by the California office will have the clause about PSA not being able to authenticate the signature.

Beyond that, PSA *does* distinguish between a signature that they believe isn't authentic and one they simply can't authenticate. In the first case, the autograph is labeled as "Questionable Authenticity." In the second case, you receive a note and a voucher (basically a gift certificate) for a future grading due to PSA being unable to authenticate the item. This second case would usually be due to a lack of contrast between the signature and the background. Since PSA is unable to definitively say "authentic" or "questionable" on the signature, they provide you with a voucher. I had this happen with a Steve Yzerman autographed rookie card that I purchased off eBay. The signature had faded to the point that I would have said it were a "2" grade, at best, but I thought it was still discernible. PSA disagreed and sent me the voucher for a credit off my next submission.

Game Used Bats
04-10-2014, 09:33 AM
Nick,

"As far as your questions about the difference in the two Gwynnexamples. There's no need to go into detail but one bat is clearly nicer thanthe other."

Well, as a rather large collector of game used bats, I cannot clearly see asto why one Gwynn is better than the other. Clearly the bat that graded an 8.5is yours and you’re not happy about that grade. You would be better served puttingtogether an argument showing details as to why one is better than the other andpresenting to John and or the forum. You chose to use this bat as the basis foran industry changing argument but have failed to provide any details as to why,and to me that seems irresponsible.

On a side note: "human nature" of a man.... I don’t understand whyyou feel the need to question a man on a public forum with frankly nonsense. Ifyou feel the industry is evolving and needs a new kind of authentication process,go out and make it happen. There is no barrier of entry, and if you have a goodproduct the industry will respond. John is a professional that has supportedthis hobby from the ground up. It’s a shame that someone could read this postand take something other than that away from it.


Anthony
RichardsonA742@aol.com

GameBats
04-10-2014, 09:45 AM
For what it's worth, I agree 100% with Anthony (Game Used Bats) posts.

- John

danesei@yahoo.com
04-10-2014, 03:06 PM
I'm going to have to disagree that JT has "only added value". I can show you examples of him selling/authenticating bats that were nowhere close to authentic.

The above quote is libelous, if you don't substantiate the claim. In the context of the thread and your other remarks, I would go so far as to say, whether intended or not, your posts seem to be directed toward somehow discrediting Mr Taube. I understand that you're upset that the 8.5 you sold through Goldin only received $550, but that doesn't justify the other claims (without substantiation) of Mr Taube selling fakes as authentic.


I don’t know where you got the idea that I interpreted that the factory record requirement meant every company must keep records in the same fashion/system as H&B bats.

I just reread my original comment, in the context of the quote, and I must apologize. When I said "you" in the post, I didn't mean you (R.C.), but more so you as in "anyone." I, perhaps, should have said "one" instead of "you" in this case, but grammatically and colloquially, either is acceptable for the point I was trying to make.

Nnunnari
04-10-2014, 03:38 PM
John & Anthony,

I appreciate your input. I want to make it clear that I hold John in high regard. He knows an incredible amount about game used bats and I would recommend anyone looking for authentication to send their bats to John. I would recommend John over anyone else in the hobby. He has a great product.

I feel that it is important for the new wave of collectors to understand the nature behind assigned grades and the blurred lines involved. It appears many people believe those grades are etched in stone, facts.

Again, John has done an incredible amount for this hobby, more than any of us could accomplish.

If I could quit my day job and make a living off authenticating/grading bats, I would, unfortunately I can't at this point in my life. I am sure PSA however, could find others to lend a helping hand.

rudyjj18
04-11-2014, 12:45 PM
Yeah, the "downgrade" for a cracked bat seems odd to me. If a bat has great provenance and shows heavy use, it should be a "10".

Example, I've got a Ryan Braun gamer from 2011. Used it to hit his 100th RBI from his MVP year (yeah, yeah, I've heard all the jokes). It has a large crack down the back side of the back and is in 2 pieces. MLB authenticated. Shows heavy use (in my opinion). Now is that deserving of a lower grade because of the significant crack? In my opinion, no. Now, if the bat showed little use, large crack, few transfer marks, etc; yes, it should get a lower grade. I get hung up on the downgrade for the crack.

rdeversole
04-11-2014, 02:14 PM
Example, I've got a Ryan Braun gamer from 2011. Used it to hit his 100th RBI from his MVP year (yeah, yeah, I've heard all the jokes). It has a large crack down the back side of the back and is in 2 pieces. MLB authenticated. Shows heavy use (in my opinion). Now is that deserving of a lower grade because of the significant crack? In my opinion, no. Now, if the bat showed little use, large crack, few transfer marks, etc; yes, it should get a lower grade. I get hung up on the downgrade for the crack.

Are you saying your bat is BROKEN into 2 pieces? Bats that are broken are generally less desirable and less valuable when compared to a cracked or uncracked bat that exhibit the same usuage. If the bat you own was exactly the same but uncracked, do you think it should grade the same as your bat did?

Lumber 1980
04-11-2014, 02:29 PM
This grading of a bat is total insanity. As I have read on this thread, either a bat is real or it's not and let me decide about the use, cracks etc. As a person who played pro baseball and known as a Batologist by my teammates and a bat Wh--- by Robin Ventura, we were teammates at OSU, I know a thing or two about lumber.

I have collected bats in person from 1977 to 1985 in Toronto, and have continued to collect to this day, even during my time as a pro. I am extremely passionate about bats. I made friends and went to school with several bat boys from the Blue Jays, yes the Seagull guy,lol. I was also able to purchase many bats from these guys over the last number of years. So, now I am selling some bats. I get asked, is there a letter or is is graded? Can you send it in for grading? These bats were obtained by me, in person, from the players hands themselves or split up amongst bat boys after every home stand and traded and sold to me over the years.

Lets get to the reality of this and the only reason why a bat has a grade, is CASH. Plain and simply, if all this authenticator had to do was say yes or no, he would not be making 100 to 300 dollars per. Vince malta's book is a must for anyone collecting bats. That can help you teach yourself about what is and what is not good. Education is the most important part of collecting with the fraud that exists today. I don't feel that any one persons grading on a bat should dictate the price for it. Rather as said before, this is a real, not fake, game used bat from the major league player named on the barrel, and us adults can take it from there.

PS.. Competition is the best form of regulation.

rudyjj18
04-11-2014, 02:32 PM
Yes, it's broken in 2 pieces. Sure, hypothetically, if Braun used a bat for his 100th RBI of 2011 and it didn't break, yes it would be worth more. But that's not the case. This is the only bat he got his 100th RBI with.

I see where you're coming from though. Should I send it into John as an experiment? :D

Lumber 1980
04-11-2014, 02:39 PM
Sorry.. I'm not sure if my personal info is on here... Todd Bargman is my name.;) A bat that is repaired is ruining the bat in my opinion. A cracked bat to me would be a bat that a player liked and used till it broke. Much more desirable to me and I know as a player that those ones are the ones I kept from my playing days.

Roady
04-11-2014, 02:42 PM
[QUOTE=
Lets get to the reality of this and the only reason why a bat has a grade, is CASH. [/QUOTE]

Winner, winner, chicken dinner!
Follow the money.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-11-2014, 04:15 PM
Yes, it's broken in 2 pieces. Sure, hypothetically, if Braun used a bat for his 100th RBI of 2011 and it didn't break, yes it would be worth more. But that's not the case. This is the only bat he got his 100th RBI with.

I see where you're coming from though. Should I send it into John as an experiment? :D

Since it's MLB authenticated (I'm guessing two stickers, since it's in two parts), I'm pretty sure you'd be wasting your time/money getting it authenticated/graded.

carbonrosa
04-12-2014, 09:41 AM
This grading of a bat is total insanity. As I have read on this thread, either a bat is real or it's not and let me decide about the use, cracks etc. As a person who played pro baseball and known as a Batologist by my teammates and a bat Wh--- by Robin Ventura, we were teammates at OSU, I know a thing or two about lumber.

I have collected bats in person from 1977 to 1985 in Toronto, and have continued to collect to this day, even during my time as a pro. I am extremely passionate about bats. I made friends and went to school with several bat boys from the Blue Jays, yes the Seagull guy,lol. I was also able to purchase many bats from these guys over the last number of years. So, now I am selling some bats. I get asked, is there a letter or is is graded? Can you send it in for grading? These bats were obtained by me, in person, from the players hands themselves or split up amongst bat boys after every home stand and traded and sold to me over the years.

Lets get to the reality of this and the only reason why a bat has a grade, is CASH. Plain and simply, if all this authenticator had to do was say yes or no, he would not be making 100 to 300 dollars per. Vince malta's book is a must for anyone collecting bats. That can help you teach yourself about what is and what is not good. Education is the most important part of collecting with the fraud that exists today. I don't feel that any one persons grading on a bat should dictate the price for it. Rather as said before, this is a real, not fake, game used bat from the major league player named on the barrel, and us adults can take it from there.

PS.. Competition is the best form of regulation.

The only problem I have with your statement is, it is well documented that players share each other's bats and to get a bat with a players name on it does not always mean that player used it. A bat boy can grab a bat and say " ya it is a game used bat from x player" but there is no proof that that player used it without knowledge of how to check for game used characteristics or the ability to check for photo matching. Just because your source says it from a certain player doesn't always make it so, even after, like you said at the end of a home stand when the bat boys split them up to sell and make their own profit. I'm a big Bryce Harper fan and he's well known to give away to fans and players including college players brand new bats and use other players bats ( he likes to use Chase Utley bats). How do I know he actually used it then if a bat boy just grabs left over bats from a dug out?

5toolplayer
04-12-2014, 03:17 PM
The only problem I have with your statement is, it is well documented that players share each other's bats and to get a bat with a players name on it does not always mean that player used it. A bat boy can grab a bat and say " ya it is a game used bat from x player" but there is no proof that that player used it without knowledge of how to check for game used characteristics or the ability to check for photo matching. Just because your source says it from a certain player doesn't always make it so, even after, like you said at the end of a home stand when the bat boys split them up to sell and make their own profit. I'm a big Bryce Harper fan and he's well known to give away to fans and players including college players brand new bats and use other players bats ( he likes to use Chase Utley bats). How do I know he actually used it then if a bat boy just grabs left over bats from a dug out?

Excellent example with the Harper bat, what u see is not always what u get. When a collector is dropping that much money on an item I guess that little piece of paper makes you feel a little better before you hit that confirm payment button. Even though it's not close to being a perfect system there's nothing worse then buying a bat only to find out later ( either by matching or expert) that is was not used by the player you thought it was. I know the buyer should always do the leg work before buying but sometimes it isn't that simple. But as much as I respect taube and the great work he does I agree that there should be different options and not just one standard IE HOF Bats, Bird Bats (those guys just do outstanding work) But we as collectors set the market. A Jeter bat with a taube letter will command $$$$$ compared to a Jeter bat with a fully detailed hall of fame bats letter??? Right now, it is what it is.

danesei@yahoo.com
04-12-2014, 07:24 PM
But as much as I respect taube and the great work he does I agree that there should be different options and not just one standard IE HOF Bats, Bird Bats (those guys just do outstanding work) But we as collectors set the market. A Jeter bat with a taube letter will command $$$$$ compared to a Jeter bat with a fully detailed hall of fame bats letter??? Right now, it is what it is.

I don't see a problem with the price discrepancy afforded "HOF Bats" (Tim) authenticated bats vs PSA authenticated bats. Part of what drives PSA prices is liquidity and accessibility of archives. Also, the pricing arbitrage makes it sometimes more affordable to purchase a bat that I have confidence in than one with no authentication/certification at all. I think the photo-matching service is a cool value add ($25 for 5+ pages of photos/comparisons), but in terms of base pricing, the spread isn't enough to justify using Tim over PSA.

I think that the big issue will always reside with the fact that, for the most part, modern gamers qualify for the lowest tier on PSA's pricing scale. At the lowest tier ($499 and less), the authentication fee is actually lower than Tim's fee, since his lowest tier starts with the limit of PSA's second lowest tier ($999 and less). As for Bird Bats, I wasn't aware that Jeff offered authentication as a service, at least not in the form of a submission-based LOA.

As for the specific case of a Jeter gamer, I can't speak to Tim's nor John's experience in dealing with game used bats from Jeter, but given the $50 difference in authentication fees between the two, the market would dictate that paying to have Tim authenticate your bat over PSA would be an unwise expenditure of resources. Again, this conclusion is driven entirely by the economics. If you value Tim's opinion on Jeter gamers, buy them at a discount, then submit them to PSA and capture whatever arbitrage there is.

I've bought a bat from Tim before, and I was pleased with the transaction. He's quite professional, and his LOA is a nice read. I've also used John's services (through PSA) for bats in the past, and he's been patient with questions I had about submissions. I would recommend either for their services, but if this is a purely economic discussion (which it tends to be), it doesn't make sense to opt for Tim's services due to the small difference in cost relative to the value of the item.

Nnunnari
04-13-2014, 10:50 AM
Good points Scott regarding Tim and Jeff. Both are very knowledgeable and are tremendous assets to the hobby. Although there may not be a "barrier of entry" to the authenticating world, I believe it is pretty clear that the hobby only wants one authenticator/grader to lean on. I believe this is evident by the lack of people using Tim's services even though he has a very nice LOA and is just as knowledgeable as other authenticators.

Danasei, this conversation is so far over your head it has become comical.

What are your opinions on special HR or Hit bats? Should these bats be graded a 10 due to their rock solid provenance or graded lower due to their light use? Shouldn't a 10 be reserved only for the finest examples of a player's gamer? It is strange to me that a bat used for one game can grade a 10 when hammered bats will grade a 9 because there is no provenance.

These two bats were used for 1-2 games, show roughly the same amount of use while one bat is cracked and one is not (neither bat submitted with a player LOA). The Gwynn is graded a GU10, the Brett is graded a GU8. Why is there a four grade difference between these two bats? Shouldn't they both be an 8/8.5 or a 9.5/10? It's the inconsistency in John's grading that really drives people crazy.

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z34/Nnunnari/Brett93_zps833ffc68.png (http://s195.photobucket.com/user/Nnunnari/media/Brett93_zps833ffc68.png.html)
http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z34/Nnunnari/TGHitBat.jpg (http://s195.photobucket.com/user/Nnunnari/media/TGHitBat.jpg.html)

danesei@yahoo.com
04-13-2014, 03:59 PM
Good points Scott regarding Tim and Jeff. Both are very knowledgeable and are tremendous assets to the hobby. Although there may not be a "barrier of entry" to the authenticating world, I believe it is pretty clear that the hobby only wants one authenticator/grader to lean on. I believe this is evident by the lack of people using Tim's services even though he has a very nice LOA and is just as knowledgeable as other authenticators.

Danasei, this conversation is so far over your head it has become comical.

What are your opinions on special HR or Hit bats? Should these bats be graded a 10 due to their rock solid provenance or graded lower due to their light use? Shouldn't a 10 be reserved only for the finest examples of a player's gamer? It is strange to me that a bat used for one game can grade a 10 when hammered bats will grade a 9 because there is no provenance.

These two bats were used for 1-2 games, show roughly the same amount of use while one bat is cracked and one is not (neither bat submitted with a player LOA). The Gwynn is graded a GU10, the Brett is graded a GU8. Why is there a four grade difference between these two bats? Shouldn't they both be an 8/8.5 or a 9.5/10? It's the inconsistency in John's grading that really drives people crazy.

Nick, I find your condescending remarks in reaction to my responses to be completely asinine and reflective of your true intent in posting this thread. If the intent were educational and/or to establish that there needs to be alternative graders, that's one thing. My response was that the market drives whether a moat is strong enough to create necessary barriers to entry.

As for your question about the Brett/Gwynn bat comparisons, a big part of the provenance may be driven by the bat itself. I'm not sure of how many of those /3000 bats were ordered (you're the expert on Gwynn, apparently, so you would know this more than anyone), but I'm guessing it was possibly as few as 20 or 30.

Nnunnari
04-13-2014, 04:39 PM
"As for your question about the Brett/Gwynn bat comparisons, a big part of the provenance may be driven by the bat itself. I'm not sure of how many of those /3000 bats were ordered (you're the expert on Gwynn, apparently, so you would know this more than anyone), but I'm guessing it was possibly as few as 20 or 30."

What? This is the problem Danasei, nothing you have said in this entire thread has made any sense. You are out of your element Donny.
I am not sure why I am even wasting my time responding to you but here goes.
I believe what you were trying to say is that the bat itself gives it legitimacy or provenance? More of the /3000 hit bats were used for promotional reasons or Spring Training than actual games.
Here is one on ebay which is no good. Another bat that passed with flying colors by John. "....bat shows evidence of signifcant game use." Yikes.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tony-Gwynn-Game-Used-Signed-1999-San-Diego-Padres-LVS-B267-Bat-JOHN-TAUBE-LOA-/251446357288?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a8b5eed28

danesei@yahoo.com
04-13-2014, 05:06 PM
What? This is the problem Danasei, nothing you have said in this entire thread has made any sense. You are out of your element Donny.
I am not sure why I am even wasting my time responding to you but here goes.
I believe what you were trying to say is that the bat itself gives it legitimacy or provenance? More of the /3000 hit bats were used for promotional reasons or Spring Training than actual games.
Here is one on ebay which is no good. Another bat that passed with flying colors by John. "....bat shows evidence of signifcant game use." Yikes.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tony-Gwynn-Game-Used-Signed-1999-San-Diego-Padres-LVS-B267-Bat-JOHN-TAUBE-LOA-/251446357288?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a8b5eed28

The bat that is in that listing on eBay is clearly a promotional bat. That is apparent by the grains per inch (looks to be in the 9+ range). Since the LOA doesn't show a picture of whatever bat was graded by John, I would say it's possible that this bat were switched out. I guess you could always ask John to verify against his own records whether that was the actual bat reviewed.