Sport: Baseball
Product: 2016 Bowman blaster
Break Date: May 12, 2016
Hit Breakdown: No guaranteed hits
Summary: After posting my last blaster break of Bowman to the Blowout forum, I got blasted by criticism, asking how I can grade a product after one blaster. While a fair question, I think something got lost - the grade for the product was mean for blasters alone, not hobby or jumbo. People seemed to miss that.
They also missed the part where I mentioned that the low product grade would be fluid based on subsequent breaks.
So, this blaster here changes that. To a point.
My critique of the card design stands - I don't think they look great. They're busy. As a graphic designer, I pay attention to that sort of thing.
Compounding my issues with the design is a card I pulled from this blaster, a Tatis family insert. I have no clue the insert name, because it's not on the card front. I didn't look closely at the card back, but I didn't see it there either.
-- ALL THAT SAID --
My second blaster was great. There were several inserts. There was an autograph. There was a numbered card (paper, to /250).
And then there was a refractor.
A red one.
Numbered to five.
Out of retail.
All told, this blaster was probably better than some of the hobby breaks. The dude on the red refractor doesn't seem to be a top prospect, but when it's /5, does anyone care? The auto, being out of retail, was on paper, but the guy seems, at the very least, to be a decent pitcher (at least at low A level).
So, this break was a solid A+, and enough came out of it to make me move that C- to a C+ this go-round. I still think the design sucks, but the return out of the packs was far greater than the first blaster - it was the exact opposite,.
Grade for the product: C+
Grade for the break: A+They also missed the part where I mentioned that the low product grade would be fluid based on subsequent breaks.
So, this blaster here changes that. To a point.
My critique of the card design stands - I don't think they look great. They're busy. As a graphic designer, I pay attention to that sort of thing.
Compounding my issues with the design is a card I pulled from this blaster, a Tatis family insert. I have no clue the insert name, because it's not on the card front. I didn't look closely at the card back, but I didn't see it there either.
-- ALL THAT SAID --
My second blaster was great. There were several inserts. There was an autograph. There was a numbered card (paper, to /250).
And then there was a refractor.
A red one.
Numbered to five.
Out of retail.
All told, this blaster was probably better than some of the hobby breaks. The dude on the red refractor doesn't seem to be a top prospect, but when it's /5, does anyone care? The auto, being out of retail, was on paper, but the guy seems, at the very least, to be a decent pitcher (at least at low A level).
So, this break was a solid A+, and enough came out of it to make me move that C- to a C+ this go-round. I still think the design sucks, but the return out of the packs was far greater than the first blaster - it was the exact opposite,.
Grade for the product: C+
Red Refractor /5: Iolana Akau
Prospect Autographs: Adam Ravenelle
Purple /250: John Norwood
Bowman Scouts Top 100: Brady Aiken
Sophomore Standouts: Addison Russell
Rookie Recollections: Chipper Jones
Family Tree: Fernando Tatis Jr. / Fernando Tatis
No comments:
Post a Comment