Why? Plus pictures of cards

This post is mostly for me, but I would love any and all feedback!  I am trying to determine how to communicate exactly what I want to collect to the blogging world.  And writing things down can help me solidify that in my own tiny mind!

So I have wantlists. Maybe you have seen them. They are somewhat extensive, and can help with trades.  But in reality, they are totally inadequate.  They show:
1. Some specific cards I want, mostly rookies
2. They have a bunch of sets that I would like to complete
3. And of course, there is the McGwire list, where I want every McGwire I don't already have.

But I often get requests from trade partners asking what else I want, because let's face it, most of you don't have a Bowman Piazza RC and card #262 from some random set and a 93 Finset McGwire refractor you are just itching to send me.

And I totally get that.  So what's my problem?  I actually like a TON of stuff that isn't on my wantlist.  So I can hear you saying, "well then put that stuff on your wantlist, dummy".  And I guess that isn't bad advice.  

Except here's the thing.  I am interested in adding a ridiculous number of cards to my collection.  

1. Almost anything vintage. 
2. Almost anything that is perceived as valuable.  Yes, perceived value matters to me.  It certainly isn't the only consideration, but, well we will get to that in the example below. 
3. I love an immense number of shiny or die cut sets from the late 90's.  And somehow, now that the card companies have come back to that and are recreating those sets as modern cards, I am somewhat less impressed.  Does that mean I don't want the newest shiny cards?  No!!  I do.  Maybe just less than the 90's stuff?  I don't know. 
4. I love rookies.  Only nowadays, that is more tricky, because there are 65 different rookie cards of any recent player.  And yes, I know that 65 may be way too low for some of popular rookies. But I would like a "good" rookie card of every player that has shown that they are a star in the league.  What is a "good" rookie?  I guess it's one that has a perceived value that isn't bottom of the barrel for that player.

And many more cards than can be covered by those 4 categories, of course.  When I look at another collectors cards, there are inevitably many, many cards I am interested in.  And walking through a card show, I see hundreds of cards I would want, that I never would have thought of to put on a list.

So if I were to try to put all of that on my wantlists, they would be completely unusable, due to the sheer clutter.

Anyway, I alluded somewhere in the last few paragraphs, to an example.  I have two examples, actually.  I kind of randomly chose Tim Duncan as my first example, to try to illustrate "what I like".  If you are not a basketball guy, scroll past the Duncan's for a baseball example.

First, a little about my Duncan collection.  He is not a primary player to collect.  But he was a stud, so I definitely accumulate his cards, as long as they fit some parameters.  That goes for almost anyone who made an impact on their sport, Baseball, Basketball and Football, so Duncan is a good example.  This analysis would fit for so many other players out there as well.

I have 30 Duncan's in my keeper collection.  3 RCs and 3 other inserts from his rookie year.  The vast remainder are inserts or parallels.  I'll show some of those down the page.  Very few base cards, but a couple!

An example of the base cards:

1999/00 Topps Gold Label - this card goes for $1.58 on COMC, so the perceived value thing is not really working in this cards favor.  But I like how it looks.  I like the Topps Gold sets in general.  And so this base card made my keepers, where most other base cards wouldn't.

An example of a "perceived value" card.  This card does not jump out at me aesthetically.  Dull shot, too much gray, and of course, it is a base card.  But on COMC, the asking price for this card is $16.93.  It's perceived value is much higher than I would have thought, so (sadly maybe) that affects how I view this card. And so it makes the collection.

Rookie card.  Like I said, I have three, and this is not my favorite.  Goofy pose, plain design.  But it is a rookie of a great player, so it definitely goes in the collection!

An example of a newer shiny card that doesn't make the cut. If this card was from the late 90s it would be a shoo in.  But it isn't, it is from 2015. And it is a base card.  If it was a parallel or serialed, it would probably make the cut, but for now at least, it does not.  If I still have this card in 15 years, will I add it?  Don't know, I am a weird guy.

Examples of cards that leap into the collection without me even having to think about it!  These show my love for color and 90s inserts! If you have any stars from any of these sets or similar, I want them!

Baseball example!!!

Clayton Kershaw.  I decided to show all of the Kershaw cards that have made my "Keeper" collection.  There are only nine.  That isn't because I don't like Kershaw, it's because I have mostly older cards, and haven't accumulated enough Claytons.

First up though, an example of a card that didn't quite make the cut.  This is a good card.  Decent presentation, and from a set that is popular.  If it were any kind of parallel or a refractor, it would certainly make the cut.  And maybe someday soon, I will change my mind and this will enter the collection.  But not yet.

Now cards that DID make the cut!

Card 1:  Shiny!!  This is a recent card that doesn't really move the perceived value meter much.  New shiny is usually pretty cheap.  The base version of this card would not make the keeper collection.  But the cool parallel does!

Card #2: Base card!!  This is my only non-rookie base card in the Kershaw collection.  And it is all about the photo.  I have seen multiple bloggers extolling the virtues of Stadium Club and this card specifically.

Card 3: SP!  Yes, this card makes the collection because it is a SP, but also because of the unusual photo.  Those baggy baby blue pants could hide a rhino!  So...  SP, colorful, unique photo.  Winner.  This card came from Night Owl in a very generous giveaway a while back.  I bet he has another copy though!!

Card 4: 2011 Topps Chrome X-Fractor.  Now we are getting deep into the Kershaws!!  Refractors of stars, always good! Very high on my list.  The older the refractor the better, but any refractor of a star! I guess Prizms kind of are the same way, but I'm old.

Card 5: So this one is a little weird.  I'm not a fan of the minor league stuff from the last 30 years or so.  It's just a money grab from the card companies to me.  But that doesn't mean that I won't accept a card like this from a stud like Clayton.  A card from this set featuring someone of less star power probably wouldn't make it, but this one does.

Card 6: An actual rookie!  Not one of his "better" ones based on perceived value, but any Kershaw RC is going to make my collection.  Period.

Card 7: An even better RC!  He's so young.  Don't need to say much about this one.

Card 8: I guess this is considered a Pre RC nowadays.  Nice card, and fits the collection.

Card 9: The beast!  Even if I hated Clayton Kershaw, this card would still have a home in my collection based on perceived value.  I was looking at comc prices while writing this article, and frankly couldn't believe what they were asking for this card.  And, like my Mike Trout RC, I have no memory of where I got this card.  Crazy!!

So there you have it.  I guess what I learned out of this is that, while there are cheap cards that I love and want, if there is a question, perceived value of the card goes a long way toward knowing if I would want it or not.  Rookies, inserts, refractors, parallels and vintage rule the roost in my collection.

Thoughts??  I'd welcome any and all feedback!