Saturday, October 4, 2008

Get Your Facts Straight, Upper Deck!

Just a few minutes ago, the mail was delivered to my house. A small envelope with my name on it was counting the seconds until it was opened. Now I don't have to buy any packs of this stuff this year.

2008 Upper Deck Masterpieces #46 Robin Yount

Wow! Fantabulous looking card! There are a handful of great poses and action shots that are out there, many of which get recycled from year to year, but this is something I've never seen before. Yount looks like he's seen a ghost out there. Maybe it's his first time stepping on the County Stadium grass. Perhaps Robin's just looking over his shoulder, wary that a little rookie hazing is headed his way, straight from the skillfully wrapped wet towel in the hand of George Scott. Whatever the cause, Robin Yount looks haunted, spooked.

Maybe he just read the back of his card.

Hold on a second, Upper Deck. What's this you're asserting about the career of Robin Yount?

I actually did a triple take after reading the back of this card. AL Rookie of the Year? Are you serious? I have no idea how that slipped by the editors. It's plain inexcusable. Believe it or not, Upper Deck, but people read the backs of cards. Yes, we still do, especially when it's a card of one of our heroes. And it's not always just to look for a serial number.
Baseball cards are a record of the past, and these records need to be accurate. For the record, Mike Hargrove was the winner of the 1974 AL Rookie of the Year Award. Yount wasn't even in the top 5. Future teammate Jim Sundberg got more votes than him. Robin had a respectable rookie season with the Brewers, batting .250 and driving in 26 runs for a bad Brewers club, nowhere near ROY status.

I'm curious how many more glaring errors like this are in this set. I'm not talking about simple typos in the stat bar or anything like that, but actual flat-out inaccuracies. If you catch any, send them along to me. I plan on writing a letter to Upper Deck asking to be put on the payroll as a copy editor or writer. I certainly couldn't do any worse, right?

7 comments:

Matt said...

That is absolutely miserable. I mean, even a cursory look at baseball-reference.com would remedy the problem.

night owl said...

Wow, that's a bad one. And it's a shame, because those are nice-looking cards.

madding said...

Clearly, the liberal media has taken over at UD Headquarters.

--David said...

Perhaps we need to create a new blog site for baseball card disasters (like the one for photoshop disasters)...

baseballcarddisasters.blogspot.com...

dayf said...

These are out already? Oh well, I didn't really need to fill up my gas tank this week. Not like any of the stations here have it anyway...

Andy said...

It took me a long time to figure out what the card was supposed to say. Finally I got it. The "As though" was supposed to say "Although". Probably there was a typo and the copy editor changed it to the wrong thing. I don't think this is a factual error, as the card was MEANT to indicate that he didn't win the award. (In fact, I misread the scan in the post like 10 times before I realized my own mistake, and thus the mistake on the card, and the guy who checked the final cards probably made the same misreading mistake as I did.)

FanOfReds said...

I pulled the Whitey Ford card from the set (card #60) and found an error on that one too. The front of the card shows 'ol Whitey holding two baseballs with a "1" on them. The back of the card says that Whitey "tallied back-to-back no-hitters." Now, THAT'S inexcusable! The front of the card shows him with two balls with a 1 on them, signifying a pair of 1 hitters that he threw back-to-back. If you make the art show a specific feat, and then you screw up the back of the card text in regards to that feat, that's pathetic. I stopped buying packs of this set because of it. If Upper Deck cares that little, then why should I?

(Nice blog by the way, I've added you to my blogroll.)