Search This Blog
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Wednesday, February 3, 2016
Friday, August 14, 2015
Box Break: 2015-16 Upper Deck MVP Retail Blaster
The base set this year is comprised of 250. The first 100 of these are quite easily obtainable. The rest are all Short Prints of either vets or Rookie, mixed with a return of the NHL Territories cards as a subset rather than inserts. These are just like the Hometown Heroes sets of old. The ever popular Silver, Gold and Super Scripts are back as well. They have also turned the Territories cards into a memorabilia parallel and included an even rarer Autograph version.
New this year is the Colors & Contours parallels which feature a whopping nine tiers to chase. There are Purple, Teal, and Gold version. I have seen some of these and they are very nice but really Upper Deck? Nine tiers of these? Is that necessary for an entry level product? Most hobby boxes should yield about six of these, the same rate as Young Guns fall in the flagship product.
What I find intriguing is the "hits". Normally MVP didn't really have anything other than the occasional Jersey card or the multi-player memorabilia cards of old. The occasional Super Script would pop up now and again but that was about it. This year, Upper Deck, while not promising anything directly, has include a "hit" per hobby box. However, the "hits" are considered either a Super Script, Auto, Jersey, 1/1, printing plate, or rookie redemption. Many collectors have already voiced their disdain as anything other than a jersey, auto, or 1/1 is generally considered not a hit. But, I repeat...it's an ENTRY LEVEL product. Not a "hit" driven release.
After hearing they were available, I made the trek to the local Target to pick up a Blaster. This year, Blaster boxes contain 24 packs with 5 cards per pack. Let me repeat...BLASTER = 24 packs! Price tag should be between $19.99-$21.99 in most locales (or if you are lucky like me, things could get mis-priced and you end up with basically two for the price of one). So to get to the particulars...
Box Breakdown:
24 Packs/Blaster Box
5 Cards/Pack
120 Cards/Blaster Box
I pulled:
113/250 Base Cards (45%, including 1-100)
1 Duplicates (Chris Kunitz)
5 Parallels - 1 Gold Script (Bryan Little); 4 Silver Scripts (Patrick Kane, Patrick Elias, Jonathan Drouin Checklist, Sam Bennett RC)
NHL Territories Jerseys - 0
Signatures - 0
Connor McDavid - 0
Anything else not a base, Script card, or hit - 0
Here are some of the "cool" cards.
Base Cards
NHL Territories Subset Cards
Short Prints
Script Cards
Wednesday, August 5, 2015
The National Wrap
![]() |
The National entrance. |
This was by no means my first trip to the rodeo, so to speak. I have attended the last five NSCC shows that have come through Chicago (my first was at the 14th show in 1993, also in Chicago at McCormick Place). Because I live so close to the city, it doesn't take much to make the 50-60 minutes trip out near O'Hare to attend a show.
![]() |
With Lou Gehrig's uniform |
We hit the show for one day out of the five it was opened. Our day of choice was Saturday, which is generally the busiest day of the show both with events, autograph guests, and foot traffic. We showed up to an already packed house at 10AM, right as the doors opened. Oh, I forgot to mention. The "we" I keep speaking about are my wife and three boys all under the age of 12, which means FREE ADMISSION! But that's not why I brought everyone. I love to share and encourage the hobby with my family. What better way to do that than to experience the biggest show of the year.
My hobby has been something that has taken up a large portion of my time, energy, and attention since I started collecting. This is why I try to involve everyone in the collecting process. My two boys are well aware of my cardboard obsession and it rubs off on them. I encourage them to participate, not just accumulate. What does that mean? Actually look at the pictures, the design, the colors. Read the stats on the back. Read the player story-lines. Staying engaged with the cardboard in your collection makes a big difference in what you collect, how you collect, and why you collect. I keep this at the forefront with my kids so they stay engaged and it is exciting for them.
![]() |
Protecting the wife from danger. |
![]() |
Getting dunked on by MJ. |
Which brings me to the FUN portion of the post. What would this hobby be without fun? It wouldn't be a hobby, that much is for sure. Sometimes I think collectors forget the fun part. It becomes more about the "hits", more about making money, more about turning a profit. It turns the hobby into a job, which is fine if that is actually your job. But for the rest of us, hobby burnout is easily achieved when the perspective inches away from fun.
![]() |
Getting ready for the Kids Break. |
![]() |
Rocky. Nuff said. |
From a collection standpoint, we picked up multiple early 2000s hockey wax boxes for the price of one of today's releases. We got to sift through dozens of boxes of $.10, $.15, $.25, and $1.00 boxes (although the kids probably were sick of that quickly). My team sets and player collections increased. I knocked a bunch off my want lists. The kids picked up a box to break together and the amount of free cards given to the kids was crazy, too thanks to Panini, Topps, and host of other dealers.
I'm glad I got to experience the National this year and I'm looking forward to 2017. But mostly, I'm glad my family got to experience it with me. Those memories will surely outlast any cardboard we added to our collections.
Labels:
#NSCC15,
card show review,
The National
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
Podcasts
Just in case you may have missed it, Sal over at Puck Junk and I have been doing a weekly podcast where we discuss hockey and hockey cards. A lot of content has been devoted to the playoffs and such but each episode we try to review either a newer set, and oldie but a goodie, or BOTH.
I put a link to them at the top of the blog on the left hand side if anyone is interested in listening. At this point, we are up to 5.
Give them a listen. Most are around a half hour. Leave a constructive comment or two.
I put a link to them at the top of the blog on the left hand side if anyone is interested in listening. At this point, we are up to 5.
Give them a listen. Most are around a half hour. Leave a constructive comment or two.
Labels:
hockey talk,
podcast,
puck junk podcast
Monday, June 8, 2015
Stat Wars
A long time ago in my living room far, far away I sat and watched a hockey game between the Pittsburgh Penguins and the New York Rangers. It was a regular season game on the Deuce (which should tell you how long ago it was) and I was only semi-interested in what was transpiring on the ice since the Pens were losing. I don't remember exactly what else I was doing other than blankly staring at a space on the wall, when I heard the announcer quip some statistic that caught my attention.
This was long before TiVO and well before the ability to pause and rewind live television, but I distinctly remember him saying that the Rangers were 6-0 while leading after two periods on the road after a previous home loss. Let me say this one again...the Rangers were 6-0...while leading after two periods...on the road...after having previously lost a home game. The first thing out of my mouth, directed toward the television screen, with no one else in the room to hear my disdain, was "Why the [expletive deleted] would anyone in the [expletive deleted] world care to know something as [expletive deleted] ridiculous as that statistic?"
And thus began my love/hate relationship with today's statistical nonsensitude. I am not naive to think that the study of statistics, as we know it, has evolved to this point for no reason. There is a reason, a good one. But there is a difference between actual readable performance statistics and what I like to call "situationally ironic stats". Let me explain.
I understand the necessity for teams in all sports to be able to analyze their players and team performance on much more than a 1s and 0s platform (a la Billy Beane). In hockey for example, the stat for goals, assists, and plus-minus (which many non-hockey people don't really understand) aren't complete at telling the whole story of what happens during a game. The analysis of possession statistics can help coaches to develop a more intricate game plan, helping to create additional chances and opportunities on the ice that their predecessors decades ago may not have had at their disposal. Things like Corsi stats which includes puck possession statistics or Fenwick numbers which are similar but don't include shot blocking are all very interesting for the stat monger fans that will argue with you ad nausea about things and literally make you move your seat at the bar.
But for the casual fan and even a long time hockey fan like me, these are fluff numbers that are for the coaches, the scouts, and even the players themselves to understand. Not me. That is why I shy away from and more often than not, turn off my brain and go to my happy place when these numbers start dancing across the TV screens, the Twitter feeds, or the occasional print media. In other words, I understand it, but I don't particularly care to pay attention.
The absolute worst though, are the anecdotes like the one previously mentioned that I call situationally ironic stats. These are meant to keep your attention. They are meant for the shock factor, to keep you watching just to see if they come true. In today's world of social media, these are the perfect tidbits of information to get you to click through. The computer nerds (and I use that term affectionately) from high school that wanted to be involved with sports but just couldn't get past the awkwardness of it all finally have their IN. These guys can sit in front of a computer with situational game play analysis software that has evolved substantially over the years with algorithms designed to spit out any number of results depending on what variables are entered. These guys just need internet access and a teleprompter and all the useless numbers get thrown at us with each passing moment.
If you have never watched a televised NHL game on NBC or NBCSports networks, then you may not be familiar with the overabundance of canon fodder that comes from Mike Emerick's mouth. He recites these types of circumstantial half-truths at least six times a game, maybe more. The playoff broadcasts are even worse.
Another great example that occurred during Game 2 of the SCF. Sportsnet Stats tweeted...
"No team in Stanley Cup Final history has lost back-to-back home games when leading each contest after 2 periods."
So logically speaking, despite leading after 2 periods, either both games were wins or at least one of these games was a loss. Therefore a lead really means nothing because you still have a 50/50 shot at pulling out a victory. Thanks. That is helpful.
I was further reminded of how long ago this phenomenon started last evening when my sons decided to watch the classic baseball movie, Little Big League. For those that have never seen it, it's from 1994, a more innocent time in baseball. It focuses on young Billy, all of 12 years old, and his adventures as the owner/manager of the Minnesota Twins. The previous owner, his grandfather, passed away and left the team to him in his will. After firing the hated team manager and appointing himself to the helm, he eventually leads the team down the road to a playoff opportunity, winning everyones hearts along the way. (see, innocent). Their radio announcer, Wally Holland, at one point in the movie gives the pinnacle of all inane stats...
"He's eight for 13 this year...against left-handers...in night games...played above the Mason Dixon Line."
Indeed.
This was long before TiVO and well before the ability to pause and rewind live television, but I distinctly remember him saying that the Rangers were 6-0 while leading after two periods on the road after a previous home loss. Let me say this one again...the Rangers were 6-0...while leading after two periods...on the road...after having previously lost a home game. The first thing out of my mouth, directed toward the television screen, with no one else in the room to hear my disdain, was "Why the [expletive deleted] would anyone in the [expletive deleted] world care to know something as [expletive deleted] ridiculous as that statistic?"
And thus began my love/hate relationship with today's statistical nonsensitude. I am not naive to think that the study of statistics, as we know it, has evolved to this point for no reason. There is a reason, a good one. But there is a difference between actual readable performance statistics and what I like to call "situationally ironic stats". Let me explain.
I understand the necessity for teams in all sports to be able to analyze their players and team performance on much more than a 1s and 0s platform (a la Billy Beane). In hockey for example, the stat for goals, assists, and plus-minus (which many non-hockey people don't really understand) aren't complete at telling the whole story of what happens during a game. The analysis of possession statistics can help coaches to develop a more intricate game plan, helping to create additional chances and opportunities on the ice that their predecessors decades ago may not have had at their disposal. Things like Corsi stats which includes puck possession statistics or Fenwick numbers which are similar but don't include shot blocking are all very interesting for the stat monger fans that will argue with you ad nausea about things and literally make you move your seat at the bar.
But for the casual fan and even a long time hockey fan like me, these are fluff numbers that are for the coaches, the scouts, and even the players themselves to understand. Not me. That is why I shy away from and more often than not, turn off my brain and go to my happy place when these numbers start dancing across the TV screens, the Twitter feeds, or the occasional print media. In other words, I understand it, but I don't particularly care to pay attention.
The absolute worst though, are the anecdotes like the one previously mentioned that I call situationally ironic stats. These are meant to keep your attention. They are meant for the shock factor, to keep you watching just to see if they come true. In today's world of social media, these are the perfect tidbits of information to get you to click through. The computer nerds (and I use that term affectionately) from high school that wanted to be involved with sports but just couldn't get past the awkwardness of it all finally have their IN. These guys can sit in front of a computer with situational game play analysis software that has evolved substantially over the years with algorithms designed to spit out any number of results depending on what variables are entered. These guys just need internet access and a teleprompter and all the useless numbers get thrown at us with each passing moment.
If you have never watched a televised NHL game on NBC or NBCSports networks, then you may not be familiar with the overabundance of canon fodder that comes from Mike Emerick's mouth. He recites these types of circumstantial half-truths at least six times a game, maybe more. The playoff broadcasts are even worse.
Another great example that occurred during Game 2 of the SCF. Sportsnet Stats tweeted...
"No team in Stanley Cup Final history has lost back-to-back home games when leading each contest after 2 periods."
So logically speaking, despite leading after 2 periods, either both games were wins or at least one of these games was a loss. Therefore a lead really means nothing because you still have a 50/50 shot at pulling out a victory. Thanks. That is helpful.
I was further reminded of how long ago this phenomenon started last evening when my sons decided to watch the classic baseball movie, Little Big League. For those that have never seen it, it's from 1994, a more innocent time in baseball. It focuses on young Billy, all of 12 years old, and his adventures as the owner/manager of the Minnesota Twins. The previous owner, his grandfather, passed away and left the team to him in his will. After firing the hated team manager and appointing himself to the helm, he eventually leads the team down the road to a playoff opportunity, winning everyones hearts along the way. (see, innocent). Their radio announcer, Wally Holland, at one point in the movie gives the pinnacle of all inane stats...
"He's eight for 13 this year...against left-handers...in night games...played above the Mason Dixon Line."
Indeed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)