"Team Source"

[Masimen]

If you are a member here and you approach me about an item from a player I collect, you should consider your past postings on this forum before you tell me the item came from a team source. last time I checked a pawn shop was not affiliated with any MLB team.

[LWMM]

What about the Rays pawning off Josh Hamilton?


On a serious note, however, the unspecified "team source" really bothers me. It is said (i.e., a team source is claimed) to build trust in an item, yet requires an even larger leap of faith: one that relies not on the analysis of an item, but on the word of the seller. While there are some people that I would take on their word that an item was sourced through the team, they are few and far between (and more often than not, those I trust are the ones that have done legitimate bulk purchases through the team).

I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here, and we all know that buyers need to do their homework. I absolutely agree with that. At the same time, however, it frustrates me when sellers do none themselves, claiming only some vague provenance.

[godwulf]

Being primarily a bat collector, the question of whether or not a particular item came from a "team source" and what its provenance, if any, happens to be, doesn't usually come up that much in my transactions or seem that important - at least to me. Jerseys, gloves, cleats - just about anything else that we collect, I think, has a greater chance of being forged, altered, or otherwise phonied up in some way. Unless you're talking about extremely high-end, vintage collectibles, bats are pretty much always what they appear to be, regardless of whose hands they passed through.

[coxfan]

In past years, there have been cases of equipment managers admitting to misrepresentation of items they slipped out of the locker room. Plus, some club personnel don't know the provenance of an item. For example, I know a local antique dealer who has a "game-used" MLB bat. When I ask for details, he gives only a vague report of a tictet manager who "thinks" the bat was used for new pitchers' BP. So "team source" is too vague without more info. I value the mode4rn authentication methods.

[xmartyx]

Being primarily a bat collector, the question of whether or not a particular item came from a "team source" and what its provenance, if any, happens to be, doesn't usually come up that much in my transactions or seem that important - at least to me. Jerseys, gloves, cleats - just about anything else that we collect, I think, has a greater chance of being forged, altered, or otherwise phonied up in some way. Unless you're talking about extremely high-end, vintage collectibles, bats are pretty much always what they appear to be, regardless of whose hands they passed through.

I'd have to say that bats are easily the most forged. It's so much easier for another player to use someone else's bat than it is to use their jersey or cleats.

[godwulf]

I'd have to say that bats are easily the most forged. It's so much easier for another player to use someone else's bat than it is to use their jersey or cleats.

Well, that's not exactly what I meant...or what I think most people mean when they see or use the word "forged".

I was thinking more along the lines of, say, a jersey having numbers, tags, patches, etc, removed and replaced, an embroidered name added to a glove, numbers changed on a helmet...in other words, creating a "game-used" item that may or may not even have been issued to, or touched by, the player with whose name its being associated.

On the other hand, have you ever heard about anyone going to the trouble of somehow removing one player's name from a bat and adding another? That kind of thing might actually have been done, by someone, at some time or other, with a very high end bat - maybe a Ruth or a Gehrig - but aside from that, I can't imagine that it happens all that much.

On the other hand, unless a jersey comes with a team letter, I tend to take any claims about it with a large grain of salt.

I also maintain that unless you've got an MLB authentication sticker, a firm photo match, or the player walked off the field and handed you the bat, you really don't know - any more than I do - whether the player whose name is on that bat used it in a game, in bp, or ever used it at all. It might have been borrowed, used and/or broken by a teammate, and the guy on the barrel never touced it once. That doesn't make such a bat "forged".

[Masimen]

I like to think that I very familiar with the player characteristics of the players who's bats I collect, therefore minimizing the chance that the bats wasn't used buy the player in question.

Not that it matters, but the item in question was not a bat.

[godwulf]

I've been buying bats - a lot of bats - from a guy who I know, without question, has routinely lied to me about where he got them. I've been a regular customer of his, both in online auctions and private deals, for twelve years now. He has told me stories about getting them from batboys, clubhouse people, etc, when I know for a fact that he bought them from the Team Shop. How he is somehow able to sell them to me for less than I suspect he paid for them - I don't know. It's a very weird situation, with which I'm not entirely comfortable.

[CampWest]

Provenance is only as good as the facts supporting it. Somebody's word with no proof or reason to believe the chain of custody is essentially worthless. If there are facts to support it, such as a known family member, a paid permanent employee, clubhouse attendant, etc., then I can accept some reliance on a good faith declaration of provenance. Generally though, I am skeptical - especially of unnamed sources with no corroborating evidence.

[momen55]

Well, that's not exactly what I meant...or what I think most people mean when they see or use the word "forged".

I was thinking more along the lines of, say, a jersey having numbers, tags, patches, etc, removed and replaced, an embroidered name added to a glove, numbers changed on a helmet...in other words, creating a "game-used" item that may or may not even have been issued to, or touched by, the player with whose name its being associated.

On the other hand, have you ever heard about anyone going to the trouble of somehow removing one player's name from a bat and adding another? That kind of thing might actually have been done, by someone, at some time or other, with a very high end bat - maybe a Ruth or a Gehrig - but aside from that, I can't imagine that it happens all that much.

On the other hand, unless a jersey comes with a team letter, I tend to take any claims about it with a large grain of salt.

I also maintain that unless you've got an MLB authentication sticker, a firm photo match, or the player walked off the field and handed you the bat, you really don't know - any more than I do - whether the player whose name is on that bat used it in a game, in bp, or ever used it at all. It might have been borrowed, used and/or broken by a teammate, and the guy on the barrel never touced it once. That doesn't make such a bat "forged".

this reminds me about a guy some time ago trying to sell a clemente college bat as a real gamer. the college name was removed and that his dad filled in the spot with putty and refinished it. he swore by that and it was his story and wasn't changing it.