Tweet
Re: A Tale of Two Fisks
After reading Dave Grob's post, here is where I believe the "crucial point" lay: “SET 1” and “SET 2” referred the set within an order. This means that depending on how many orders where made, there could in fact be more than one “SET 1” or “SET 2” for a player during the same given year.
I had never thought of sets in that specific way before. That is, a set pertain to a specific purchase order and that multiple purchase orders can be made. Under that scenario, 3 different purchase orders during the course of a year, for example, would mean 3 different "Set 1"'s. For some reason, I had previously assumed that only 1 purchase order is made each season. (The rest of Grob's post wasn't all that enlightening. I was aware of the existence of multiple sets (set 3's, 4's, etc) and his theory that jerseys marked with a "3", for example, or "4" may not refer to actual "sets" but rather simply a specific jersey's order within an entire purchase/inventory only seems to make sense when the jerseys are not specifically tagged or referred to as "sets". If the team is calling it a set (as many do) and/or it's clearly tagged with the word "set" (as these Fisks are), then it most likely is part of a set rather than part of an entire inventory).
Additionally, I think this entire "multiple set 1's" issue hinges on what constitutes a set. Previously, I had accepted "common knowledge" that a set was specifically 1 home, 1 road, 1 alternate. As Mike's post alluded to, a set can be anything the team wants it to be. What's to say that the Oakland A's, for example, didn't decide that a set, for them, would consist of 2 homes and 2 roads. Therefore it'd be normal to find 2 Oakland A's set 1 home jerseys. I suppose the logical followup question is who determines what a set will consist of: the team or the manufacturer? I don't know the answer to that.
All of that said, I think in the context of these Fisks, and similar era Rawlings jerseys with specific "set" tagging, I think one valid explanation for the existence of multiple same set/same year/same style jerseys is, as Dave Grob suggested, multiple purchase orders during the course of a season. I think another valid reason may be that in some cases the team determines what constitutes a set and order jerseys with set tagging that reflects their own proprietary definition/system.
Rudy.
After reading Dave Grob's post, here is where I believe the "crucial point" lay: “SET 1” and “SET 2” referred the set within an order. This means that depending on how many orders where made, there could in fact be more than one “SET 1” or “SET 2” for a player during the same given year.
I had never thought of sets in that specific way before. That is, a set pertain to a specific purchase order and that multiple purchase orders can be made. Under that scenario, 3 different purchase orders during the course of a year, for example, would mean 3 different "Set 1"'s. For some reason, I had previously assumed that only 1 purchase order is made each season. (The rest of Grob's post wasn't all that enlightening. I was aware of the existence of multiple sets (set 3's, 4's, etc) and his theory that jerseys marked with a "3", for example, or "4" may not refer to actual "sets" but rather simply a specific jersey's order within an entire purchase/inventory only seems to make sense when the jerseys are not specifically tagged or referred to as "sets". If the team is calling it a set (as many do) and/or it's clearly tagged with the word "set" (as these Fisks are), then it most likely is part of a set rather than part of an entire inventory).
Additionally, I think this entire "multiple set 1's" issue hinges on what constitutes a set. Previously, I had accepted "common knowledge" that a set was specifically 1 home, 1 road, 1 alternate. As Mike's post alluded to, a set can be anything the team wants it to be. What's to say that the Oakland A's, for example, didn't decide that a set, for them, would consist of 2 homes and 2 roads. Therefore it'd be normal to find 2 Oakland A's set 1 home jerseys. I suppose the logical followup question is who determines what a set will consist of: the team or the manufacturer? I don't know the answer to that.
All of that said, I think in the context of these Fisks, and similar era Rawlings jerseys with specific "set" tagging, I think one valid explanation for the existence of multiple same set/same year/same style jerseys is, as Dave Grob suggested, multiple purchase orders during the course of a season. I think another valid reason may be that in some cases the team determines what constitutes a set and order jerseys with set tagging that reflects their own proprietary definition/system.
Rudy.
Comment