David Cone jersey on eBay

[sportsnbikes]

What is everyone's thoughts on this jersey? It says 1981 and that was the year he was drafted. He didn't wear #54 with the Royals. Is this possibly a minor league jersey? I messaged the seller a few days ago and they have not responded.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DAVID-CONE-Game-Used-Worn-Jersey-ROYALS-PERFECT-GAME-/250644467579?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a5b930f7b

[Phil316]

blueschipsports has had mixed reviews. A lot of people have trouble with them not replying or taking forever.

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=2241&highlight=blue+chip+sports

http://www.network54.com/Forum/379976/message/1117729026/Any+Opinions+Regarding+Blue+Chip+Sports-

With anything i would do your homework.

[Phil316]

from the description


jersey shows a number and name change on the back from his rookie years. Jersey shows nice, even game use with letter/number puckering and no holes, tears or alterations.

If it has a name and number change would that not make in altered ?

[sox83cubs84]

from the description



If it has a name and number change would that not make in altered ?

The alteration was likely a team-performed NOB and number change done on a 1981 gamer to accommodate Cone for either 1982 or 1983 spring training. Back then, the norm was to use jersey from the previous year or two in a given year's spring training.

March 1983 would have been the last time the Royals wore pullover jerseys, as in the 1983 regular season they went to button-down jerseys. Also, Cone missed the 1983 minor league season due to injury, but I have not been able to determine if that injury came before or during spring training.

My belief is that the jersey was issued to Cone for spring training one of those two years.

Dave Miedema

[Phil316]

In my opinion It still makes the jersey altered regardless if done by team as it is not in its original condition as it was used back in 81.

If I was interested in this jersey I would want better provenance than assumptions. Especially for that kind of cash.

[sportsnbikes]

Thanks for the responses guys. I wish there weren't so many gray areas in this hobby. I guess I will stay away. I don't collect ST items and since he didn't wear 54 in a ML game that means I'm out.

[Phil316]

Thanks for the responses guys. I wish there weren't so many gray areas in this hobby

I could not agree more.

I have passed up some jerseys that very well could be what they are advertised as myself because of this or that. I just cannot take a chance on a jersey for that kind of money or take the word of a seller without a photo match.

[sportsnbikes]

Not only that but I could never pass something off as game used if I wasn't certain. I'm at that point that I don't think I'd even buy a bat with a PSA or other company letter stating their opinion. I'm even kind of getting leery of MLB with mistakes I've been seeing. As you said, a photo match is iron clad. More so than any piece of paper.

[sox83cubs84]

In my opinion It still makes the jersey altered regardless if done by team as it is not in its original condition as it was used back in 81.

If I was interested in this jersey I would want better provenance than assumptions. Especially for that kind of cash.

No argument on the first point, and, while I don't personally insist on photo matches for my collection that price tag for a NOB and number changed spring training jersey would be too rich for my blood.

Dave M.

[DeacDoug]

I have the blue jersey "54" Cone jersey. This one should be good but presumably has name and number change like mine.