Game used when player doesn't play.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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!