Bat Grading Discussion

[GoTigers]

Is grading for authentication or eye appeal? I don't think a MLB auth or photomatched bat even with light use should grade lower than an example with heavy use and is not photomatched or mlb auth.

[R. C. Walker]

Just like coin collecting and baseball card collecting ... they take the fun out of a hobby by assigning grades to things ... This way it is not "Look how cool my item is" it is "Look how much my item is worth "

You are so correct It's not about authenticating nor a subjective grading system. It's all about maximizing a perceived premium dollar amount due to a supposed "Expert Opinion".

Do you really need to have someone else give you a definition of Light, Medium or Heavy use?

Also, factory records. I know of Louisville Slugger factory records. Who knows of or has access to records for Adirondak, Rawlings, Trinity, Murrucci, Chandler and the myriad of other bat manufacturers? Does that mean no 10's for those bats?

I believe collectors know about a particular players bat characteristics and definitely know the definition of light, medium or heavy use just as much if not more than an expert. Collectors educate themselves regarding the hobby. Speculators need an outside source for validation. The only person who ends out on top is the person you gave $$$ to give their opinion..

[danesei@yahoo.com]

Just like coin collecting and baseball card collecting ... they take the fun out of a hobby by assigning grades to things ...

Coin collecting has had grading since well before the current Sheldon scale was used. I'm fairly certain that everyone alive today never collected coins in an environment where a grading system didn't exist. I would assume the same is true about sports cards, but I can't be positive. On coins, I'm sure.

[Nnunnari]

Coin collecting has had grading since well before the current Sheldon scale was used. I'm fairly certain that everyone alive today never collected coins in an environment where a grading system didn't exist. I would assume the same is true about sports cards, but I can't be positive. On coins, I'm sure.

Seriously?
Danesei, I appreciate you chiming in but I am more interested in hearing opinions of respected bat collectors, i.e. Jason, Jimmy and R.C. We don't need an off topic response to every post.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

Seriously?
Danesei, I appreciate you chiming in but I am more interested in hearing opinions of respected bat collectors, i.e. Jason, Jimmy and R.C. We don't need an off topic response to every post.

I haven't made an off-topic response to every post. In fact, I think the response is quite relevant, unlike the comment that I was responding to. Grading systems aren't only about resale value. They also protect new collectors who aren't quite aware of what creates good value. Knowledge is gained (generally) from two sources: Experience (collecting your mistakes, as Vince Malta would say) and education (studying what others have written on the subject or learning directly from experts). Much like paying an accountant or a financial advisor for things that you could do on your own, collectors who simply don't have knowledge pay a premium for expertise.

I agree (as I've said before) that there is a need for additional experts in the field to step up and work with PSA so there isn't a problem, should something happen to Taube. However, I completely disagree with arguments against having a grading system of some sort. Maybe the current system isn't perfect (or even close), but it's what we have. Unless someone comes up with a better system that can be actively implemented, I think that what Taube and Malta do with PSA is better than nothing. Yes, it would be wonderful if
there were more graders (and we don't really know with certainty that there aren't), but having one grader who most collectors trust is better than having dubious sellers controlling the market.

[Birdbats]

Grading is a wonderful thing for cards and coins because the only perspective considered is aesthetics. There is a standard system for "point deductions" based on flaws -- centering, corner sharpness, printing registration, gloss, etc. But, bats are a completely different animal because the grade goes beyond aesthetics to include authenticity based on use characteristics.

It's like having a contest where people are judged on their singing AND cooking skills. You can judge singing, you can judge cooking (both subjectively, of course)... but combining the two creates an odd competition. To me, it's even worse with bats because there is inherent conflict between aesthetics and use. For example, an older Adirondack bat can be docked points for flaked foil stamping -- but if the loss of markings is the result of heavy use, is it really a flaw? Or, there's the McGwire example, where we know (at least during his Cardinals days) that he stopped using bats for essentially one of two reasons -- it couldn't be used anymore (crack or deadwood), or he signed it and gave it to an acquaintance or museum. To me, a cracked McGwire Cardinals bat should grade higher than an uncracked bat because there's a higher likelihood he actually used it. But, with a generic scale that adds aesthetics to the equation, a cracked Mac bat loses points for the crack.

I think there would be value in grading if it was limited to authenticity/use characteristics. However, to be truly useful, grading would need to be akin to judging dogs at Westminster -- each example would need to be graded according to the "ideal" for its breed. For one player, an ideal bat could be lightly used because that player has a tendency to go through many bats and prefers new wood. For another player, it might require heavy use and tar. Or handle tape or scoring. Or ball marks in a particular location. Or cleat marks on the barrel. Or a uniform number written in a certain way. Such a system would require many experts because no one person could possibly determine the "standard" for every player.

Even that kind of system could be controversial. Consider the photo-matched bat with MLB hologram that cracks before it can acquire the player's typical use characteristics (heavy tar, excessive ball marks). Would such a well-documented bat deserve to grade lower than an undocumented bat with perfect use characteristics? Using the dog show analogy, is it fair to say, "Well, it certainly is a real beagle, but it's not an ideal beagle" and, therefore, grade it lower?

As for aesthetics, the reality is some collectors like cracks and some don't. Some like restored and some don't. Some like light use and some like heavy. This isn't like coins, where I can't imagine there's a huge subset of collectors who want heavy wear and nicks because it proves the coin was "used." The value of a game-used bat, as influence by a grade, should be determined by the likelihood it actually was used by the player in question and whether it possesses the ideal use characteristics. Beyond that, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You could have bats graded 10 that are cracked or uncracked and different collectors will value them in different ways.

[Lunytune2]

Grading is a wonderful thing for cards and coins because the only perspective considered is aesthetics. There is a standard system for "point deductions" based on flaws -- centering, corner sharpness, printing registration, gloss, etc. But, bats are a completely different animal because the grade goes beyond aesthetics to include authenticity based on use characteristics.

It's like having a contest where people are judged on their singing AND cooking skills. You can judge singing, you can judge cooking (both subjectively, of course)... but combining the two creates an odd competition. To me, it's even worse with bats because there is inherent conflict between aesthetics and use. For example, an older Adirondack bat can be docked points for flaked foil stamping -- but if the loss of markings is the result of heavy use, is it really a flaw? Or, there's the McGwire example, where we know (at least during his Cardinals days) that he stopped using bats for essentially one of two reasons -- it couldn't be used anymore (crack or deadwood), or he signed it and gave it to an acquaintance or museum. To me, a cracked McGwire Cardinals bat should grade higher than an uncracked bat because there's a higher likelihood he actually used it. But, with a generic scale that adds aesthetics to the equation, a cracked Mac bat loses points for the crack.

I think there would be value in grading if it was limited to authenticity/use characteristics. However, to be truly useful, grading would need to be akin to judging dogs at Westminster -- each example would need to be graded according to the "ideal" for its breed. For one player, an ideal bat could be lightly used because that player has a tendency to go through many bats and prefers new wood. For another player, it might require heavy use and tar. Or handle tape or scoring. Or ball marks in a particular location. Or cleat marks on the barrel. Or a uniform number written in a certain way. Such a system would require many experts because no one person could possibly determine the "standard" for every player.

Even that kind of system could be controversial. Consider the photo-matched bat with MLB hologram that cracks before it can acquire the player's typical use characteristics (heavy tar, excessive ball marks). Would such a well-documented bat deserve to grade lower than an undocumented bat with perfect use characteristics? Using the dog show analogy, is it fair to say, "Well, it certainly is a real beagle, but it's not an ideal beagle" and, therefore, grade it lower?

As for aesthetics, the reality is some collectors like cracks and some don't. Some like restored and some don't. Some like light use and some like heavy. This isn't like coins, where I can't imagine there's a huge subset of collectors who want heavy wear and nicks because it proves the coin was "used." The value of a game-used bat, as influence by a grade, should be determined by the likelihood it actually was used by the player in question and whether it possesses the ideal use characteristics. Beyond that, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You could have bats graded 10 that are cracked or uncracked and different collectors will value them in different ways.

Grading is a good thing ... but how is a bat graded ... in coins and baseball cards it is the pristine condition (which I believe there is no 10 baseball card or ms70 coin .... mass production is NEVER perfect) ... a perfect unused bat is essentally worthless in my opinion , and how would a beat up heavily used bat get a "10" ... because someone said so who is an expert .... so a $150 bat is now a $500 bat ?????? REALLY !

[Lunytune2]

Bat grading sounds more like authenticating to me ... someone just thought it needed a number scale instead of just a genuine

[Nnunnari]

Excellent post Jeff, thanks for sharing.

To one of your points, most players will naturally use their favorite gamers until it breaks. Docking a bat a half point for a crack (unless it's a severe crack) is asinine in my eyes.

[gingi79]

Bat grading sounds more like authenticating to me ... someone just thought it needed a number scale instead of just a genuine

I agree. I always saw Comic Book grading and Card grading as logical. Like BirdBats said, look at the aesthetic, how it matches perfect printing, centering, colors, etc.

Game used stuff is intrenched in one of two camps. Real and Bogus. Using a grading scale is like saying "This is a photomatched example of one bat used by a player in one at bat during a 15 year career. Grade 10." Any deviations require a demerit of "X" points.

Even with a length and breadth of knowledge like John, mistakes are made. Not intentional, but it does happen. I'm not advocating he needs additional authenticators as much as eliminating this nonsense grading scale. Stuff is real or it isn't. Logically, that should be the one and only grade assigned to game used items. But it will never happen.

A 5.0 from MEARS or John or anyone means they are 50 percent sure this is the real deal. Even a 6.5 is only a 65% approval rating. Try suing someone whose opinion is there is only a 65% chance this is what it is proported to be.

Never forget, people put a premium on MeiGray items because they stand behind their stuff. Forever. No grades, no conjecture, prove it's fake 25 years from now....full refund.