Game used when player doesn't play.

[costas]

What's the community's general view on game used items, particularly jerseys, authenticated as game used but the player doesn't play in the game. An example would be a relief pitcher who sit in the bullpen and isn't called to pitch.

Should these items still sell at the same value as a jersey where the player plays? Do collectors find value in them items or prefer to stay away from them? Input appreciated, thanks!

[Roady]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

In my mind, if a players doesn't play it is not game used.

I will not buy an item a player wore sitting in the dugout the whole game.

[metsbats]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

The way MLB authenticates jerseys as attributed to one game just because they picked it up after that one game is flawed. Most players wear jerseys over a few games or weeks or months and the jersey may have actually been worn in a game (except in cases of players known to wear customized jerseys during games like Pedro Martinez).

So the value goes down because this link was made for the sake of authentication in my opinion. However if the game was a special event (ie ASG, WS, no-hitter) I would consider paying a premium especially if the jersey had special tagging or patches.

[coxfan]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

The issue of a lack of accepted terminology comes up in various threads at times. My view is that a reliever who sits in the bullpen has "game-ready"equipment, and a ball that doesn't leave the umpire's bucket was "game-ready". Things like locker tags, dugout lineup cards, and practice-only balls are "team-used."

But others use different terms. Sellers typically use "game-used" for all of the above.

[Lunytune2]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

It is game worn .. just not game used ... some people collect for the player , some for significance . I have a Tony Sanchez wildcard game jersey that he did not play in ... but it was his and he did wear it during that game. And like others said , he probably wore it in another game before that.

[mbenga28]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

Are game worn and game used two different terms as Lunytune2 mentioned? That could create confusion when a team LOA says game used when it was just game worn by a player.

[HawaiiSportsNut]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

It would be so much easier if there was an industry standard for game memorabilia. But while a team or reputable sellers may follow the standards there will be many sellers that would write the description just to make the sale.

As a standard I personally would like to see something along these lines,

Game Used: Worn by players during game action.

Game Worn: Worn by players during warm up or while on the bench.

Game/Team Issued: Issued by the team for the intent of game action but never worn by the player at any point.

[mbenga28]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

It would be so much easier if there was an industry standard for game memorabilia. But while a team or reputable sellers may follow the standards there will be many sellers that would write the description just to make the sale.

As a standard I personally would like to see something along these lines,

Game Used: Worn by players during game action.

Game Worn: Worn by players during warm up or while on the bench.

Game/Team Issued: Issued by the team for the intent of game action but never worn by the player at any point.

How about when MLB Authenticated describes a jersey as game used while it was only game worn?

[HawaiiSportsNut]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

How about when MLB Authenticated describes a jersey as game used while it was only game worn?

That is why there has to be an industry standard. I have bought a jersey as game used according to the MLB Authentication when I know for a fact that the player did not see any game action. The standards has to start from the MLB, NHL or the NFL to make it all work out. Unless they take the lead it will be extremely hard for it to work.

[Lunytune2]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

That is why there has to be an industry standard. I have bought a jersey as game used according to the MLB Authentication when I know for a fact that the player did not see any game action. The standards has to start from the MLB, NHL or the NFL to make it all work out. Unless they take the lead it will be extremely hard for it to work.

This is why the buyer needs to do there homework before buying !

[Dewey2007]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

Although the terms in the hobby are interchangeable like others I consider a jersey "game used" when it was used in an actual game. If the guy sat on the bench then it is "game worn".

When I first joined the forum I suggested to the moderators at the time that they start a Sticky or Exceptionally Educational Thread of hobby related terms that collectors, especially new ones, could refer to. Never got a response but I think it would still be a good thing to try and do.

In addition (and next to impossible I'm sure) it would be nice to see the forum take the lead in trying to establish a standard glossary of terms used throughout the hobby like this 'game used vs game worn' one that comes up or at least terminology/definitions that are accepted here on the forum would be a good start. Maybe there could be a summit held at the National to discuss this issue since that seems to be the one time that most of the bigwigs and auction houses in the hobby are all in one place.

[rufusandherschel]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

In addition (and next to impossible I'm sure) it would be nice to see the forum take the lead in trying to establish a standard glossary of terms used throughout the hobby like this 'game used vs game worn' one that comes up or at least terminology/definitions that are accepted here on the forum would be a good start. Maybe there could be a summit held at the National to discuss this issue since that seems to be the one time that most of the bigwigs and auction houses in the hobby are all in one place.

Great idea/excellent start! Input, concurrence and agreement of the auction houses would seem to be essential. Possibly Chris and Forum moderators could get the 'ball rolling".

[Rob L]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

I collect Troy Percival items so he obviously was in the bullpen alot. I do have a "GU" uniform from a TBTC game. He was eligible to play but didn't get in. I have pictures of him wearing the uniform (made a great photomatch) and it is dirty. I would think, in terms of relief pitchers, that if they are eligible on the roster but don't get in, it is still game used IMHO.

[icollectDCsports]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

I think it's too late and too nuanced for most folks to distinguish between "game used" and "game worn," which have been applied interchangeably for a quite a while. To me, the word "game" shouldn't apply if the item was never used (in the case of equipment) or worn (in the case of uniform items) on the playing field during competition. A good example is a uniform item issued for use for in one game, such as a throwback jersey. If a starting pitcher didn't appear in the game, no "game" use or wear. Same for a position player who didn't get in the game. Perhaps "bench worn" or "bench used" would be more appropriate.

But what about a uniform item worn by a manager? Although he may in some games stay in the bench area for the entire game, I'd call it "game used" or "game worn" because it was worn by one actively participating in the game according to his role.

I do think all of this is worth discussing. However, I can't see MLB, for instance, changing their authentication categories based on these distinctions. Too much work.

[rufusandherschel]

Re: Game used when player doesn't play.

However, I can't see MLB, for instance, changing their authentication categories . . . "

Good point! MLB's authentication categories/classification system is/are part of the problem and confusion.