Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

[bigtruck260]

Hey everyone,

I wish I posted more in the forum, but after reading a few threads here lately, I know why I stopped. I guess I am more of a lurker these days.

In the tradition of the old school, I am going to make a post that I hope will clear up a few things that bothered me personally.

A freshly banned poster claimed on this site that a member in good standing (and a prolific Pujols collector...and friend of mine) blatantly sold a Pujols BP bat on another site. That in and of itself is not really a horrific problem, since MLB claims that BP bats ARE considered game used by their standards.

The real issue is that the banned poster also claimed that Bert (Shoremen44) blatantly removed tape from a bat that was purchased from Ball Park Heroes (Kim Stigall) and re-sold it without mentioning the removal of said tape.

I remember BOTH bats, and actually had a photo saved of the BPH bat in question. I posted it in THIS thread as a matter of fact (July of 2008)

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=17384&highlight=pujols+knob+tape

In this thread Bert mentions that he has a 2002 Rawlings ALREADY with BP and game use. He comments that he has never owned or seen a Pujols bat with tape.

To me, this is the best proof that Bert's bat is not the same as the bat from BPH. I have known Bert for a long time, and have never known him as someone who is out to 'steal' from someone else.

Hopefully, this post does not get me into trouble. I am just trying to get some missed facts out there. If I am wrong about any of this, I sincerely apologize.

Dave

[gingi79]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

Wait Dave,

I am confused here. Are you saving that the poster I spent hours begging to provide proof of his accusations actually was incorrect? That all of my positive yet annoying questioning resulted in proof that Bert, a member of this website who has provided insight into game worn materials with proof and facts, was selling a bat without screwing other collectors and you have proof? You must be covering for him. No wait, are you a mod with undocumented bias?

[bigtruck260]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

Wait Dave,

I am confused here. Are you saving that the poster I spent hours begging to provide proof of his accusations actually was incorrect? That all of my positive yet annoying questioning resulted in proof that Bert, a member of this website who has provided insight into game worn materials with proof and facts, was selling a bat without screwing other collectors and you have proof? You must be covering for him. No wait, are you a mod with undocumented bias?

I read both threads and tried hard to see both sides of the coin...

I know that there are guys in the autograph field that pester guys on eBay for selling fakes. 90% of the time, they are right - but occasionally they go after a guy who is an in-person collector who simply has a variance of a player's auto that looks bad...but its still legit.

The thing about this site (and the reason I was drawn to it) was the intent of many of the posters (guys like Andrew Lang and Jeff Scott). We have to have hard facts in hand before accusing anyone.

D

[allstarsplus]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

I read both threads and tried hard to see both sides of the coin...

I know that there are guys in the autograph field that pester guys on eBay for selling fakes. 90% of the time, they are right - but occasionally they go after a guy who is an in-person collector who simply has a variance of a player's auto that looks bad...but its still legit.

The thing about this site (and the reason I was drawn to it) was the intent of many of the posters (guys like Andrew Lang and Jeff Scott). We have to have hard facts in hand before accusing anyone.

D

Thanks for posting your information. I am trying to stay fair and impartial. I just got another email from basketballbones and Jeff Scott was kind enough to email me with his thoughts.

After seeing the photo of the BPH bat and the tape I can see that Bert's bat IMO probably was taped at one time but it doesn't mean Bert removed the tape. To accuse someone with no proof isn't fair is all I am saying.

Also, Rawlings can make several bats in a batch so I don't doubt that Albert would have prepped a few bats for BP.

Here is the photo of the BPH bat with the tape and the other 2 are Bert's bat.

[shoremen44]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

I first wanted to say that I appreciate the emails from members and friends that support me... I have found guys on this forum that despite not meeting most of you I would consider you close friends. I also appreciate the forum memebers who don't even know me, but have come to a fellow forum member's defense in the way this was handled

as far as the Rawlings bat goes... I have owned at one point in time 3 different Rawlings bats according to the sometimes great and sometimes poor record keeping I keep... one was from 2001 and the other 2 were from 2002. NONE of which had tape when I bought them.

Did the bat I sold have tape on it at one time... I don't know... there is a line down near the handle, however there is also one up near the middle of the bat, could be from tape, but it could also be a tar rag... I have several bats with defined lines, what I do know is that I bought it without tape and have had the bat in the same condition for over three years.

With that said I have contacted BPH to see if they have records of the bat, if they respond with some evidence that I can show that both bats are the same, I will be the first one to tell the buyer of my bat that it once had tape, and I will offer a full refund... I have always stood behind everything I have sold, and will continue to do so... I have been screwed in the past and if this hobby was only about money I wouldn't collect, as I am sure I am not the only one who has spent much more than they will ever get back.



What really bothers me about all this it that Basketballbones, whomever he or she is has never had the common courtesy to contact me personally... its not like they cant find my email address or screename... my email is on the bottom of every post, on my site, and on all my ebay listings.

I am not a perfect person, I make mistakes just like everyone else, if I sell an item that I later find out to be altered or fake, I would always make it right....

However instead of voicing their concerns they decide to attack me publically with no evidence...


I would like to thank Andrew Lang... he is the only person who has even bothered to contact me and discuss this in length.


I appologize for using profanity in my first post, however being called a lier, a cheat, and a theif by someone I have never talked to got me more than a little angry.

The bottom line is this... I have never nor will I ever alter an item I posess, as a collector I believe that to be one of the most agregious things someone can do... and should I find out an item I sell is not 100% I would make it right with the buyer... I would have told Basketballbones this if they ever attempted to contact me, but I was never given the chance

thanks
Bert

[3arod13]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

I first wanted to say that I appreciate the emails from members and friends that support me... I have found guys on this forum that despite not meeting most of you I would consider you close friends. I also appreciate the forum memebers who don't even know me, but have come to a fellow forum member's defense in the way this was handled

as far as the Rawlings bat goes... I have owned at one point in time 3 different Rawlings bats according to the sometimes great and sometimes poor record keeping I keep... one was from 2001 and the other 2 were from 2002. NONE of which had tape when I bought them.

Did the bat I sold have tape on it at one time... I don't know... there is a line down near the handle, however there is also one up near the middle of the bat, could be from tape, but it could also be a tar rag... I have several bats with defined lines, what I do know is that I bought it without tape and have had the bat in the same condition for over three years.

With that said I have contacted BPH to see if they have records of the bat, if they respond with some evidence that I can show that both bats are the same, I will be the first one to tell the buyer of my bat that it once had tape, and I will offer a full refund... I have always stood behind everything I have sold, and will continue to do so... I have been screwed in the past and if this hobby was only about money I wouldn't collect, as I am sure I am not the only one who has spent much more than they will ever get back.



What really bothers me about all this it that Basketballbones, whomever he or she is has never had the common courtesy to contact me personally... its not like they cant find my email address or screename... my email is on the bottom of every post, on my site, and on all my ebay listings.

I am not a perfect person, I make mistakes just like everyone else, if I sell an item that I later find out to be altered or fake, I would always make it right....

However instead of voicing their concerns they decide to attack me publically with no evidence...


I would like to thank Andrew Lang... he is the only person who has even bothered to contact me and discuss this in length.


I appologize for using profanity in my first post, however being called a lier, a cheat, and a theif by someone I have never talked to got me more than a little angry.

The bottom line is this... I have never nor will I ever alter an item I posess, as a collector I believe that to be one of the most agregious things someone can do... and should I find out an item I sell is not 100% I would make it right with the buyer... I would have told Basketballbones this if they ever attempted to contact me, but I was never given the chance

thanks
Bert

Bert, great post and response! You've always been a class act individual!

[Titans74]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

Bert,

I don't know you. But great straight forward, genuine post. Thank you.

[onlyalbert]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

I'm kind of new to the forum but have been working on acquiring one of Bert's bats. He has always been upfront and helpful with me on his bats and others that I have looked at, and I have been in contact with him way before I made it on here. Bert, keep up the good work and turn loose of that 09.

[metsbats]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

I read both threads and tried hard to see both sides of the coin...

I know that there are guys in the autograph field that pester guys on eBay for selling fakes. 90% of the time, they are right - but occasionally they go after a guy who is an in-person collector who simply has a variance of a player's auto that looks bad...but its still legit.

The thing about this site (and the reason I was drawn to it) was the intent of many of the posters (guys like Andrew Lang and Jeff Scott). We have to have hard facts in hand before accusing anyone.

D

We have to have hard facts in hand before accusing anyone.

This precisely the reason why basketballbones was issued a 10 day ban.

Folks need to understand this.

The fact that the moderator group has reached out to folks like Jeff Scott nd Kim Stigall shows no bias and we are dedicate to exposing issues inside and outside in the house.

This think otherwise is foolish.

[metsbats]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

Thanks for posting your information. I am trying to stay fair and impartial. I just got another email from basketballbones and Jeff Scott was kind enough to email me with his thoughts.

After seeing the photo of the BPH bat and the tape I can see that Bert's bat IMO probably was taped at one time but it doesn't mean Bert removed the tape. To accuse someone with no proof isn't fair is all I am saying.

Also, Rawlings can make several bats in a batch so I don't doubt that Albert would have prepped a few bats for BP.

Here is the photo of the BPH bat with the tape and the other 2 are Bert's bat.
[ATTACH]46100[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]46101[/ATTACH]



[ATTACH]46099[/ATTACH]

Here's close up photo of the bat from a previous thread showing individual player collections for comparison purposes. (date 2/18/10)

[metsbats]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

Here are two photos side by side.

The area of around the red ring appears to have more darker grain on the BPH Pujols verses the Bert Pujols.

Additionally the knob on the Bert Pujols appears to have marks and usage. The BPH bat was taped on the knob which would make the handle cleaner if the tape had been removed.

Just my observations. I'll add my opinion that based on the grain marks around the ring these are not the same bats.

[rj_lucas]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

I'm getting to this party a little late, as the original posts were written well after my bedtime

I just wanted to make two quick points. First, add my voice to those who count Bert as a stand-up guy, as honest as the day is long.

Second, Bert is right on the money when he says that Albert's bats sometimes feature sharp, well defined lines from a tar rag.

Notice the lines on my 2005 SAM, one down by the grip, the other above the logo. Those are rag lines.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[metsbats]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=17384&highlight=pujols+rawlings

According to this thread the 2002 Pujols was still on BPH's inventory as of July 2008 and at the same time Bert mentioned he was in possession of a 2002 Rawlings Pujols. Assuming Bert is referring to the 2002 bat he just sold on ebay I'm not sure how the BPH bat can be the same one.

[chakes89]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

Is it just me or does it look the barrel of the top bat had tape on it at one time?

Because there is an noticeable change in color as it goes from light to dark around around the "L and S" in "Pujols"

This might just be from the wood grain or it may have come from tape being on the barrel then being removed.

Just a thought (And sorry if this was already mentioned)

[metsbats]

Re: Pujols 2002 Rawlings - Important Please read!

As Jeff stated Pujols typically used Rawlings during BP but to a lesser extent in game situations in 2001 and 2002. This would certainly explain why the end of the barrel looked like it was taped at one point. The Rawlings may have been a BP bat promoted to a gamer. Bert indicated both green BP ball marks and dark game colored ball marks on this bat too.