2021-22 Panini Chronicles Basketball Forum

Is there a reason there aren't that many RC designations on these cards here?  Chronicles is loaded with rookie cards but it only looks like a handful get the RC here.  Is there a rhyme and/or reason to it?

From my understanding, RC designations in baseball are negotiated between card makers, MLB, and the MLBPA prior to the season. This explains why Spencer Strider had a RC designation and Michael Harris did not (even though both were considered "rookies" this year.) In negotiation, some players are figured to at least see some playing time in their first year in the league, and others are kind of an odd-ball move (call-ups like Michael Harris, or Adley Rutschmann) who are almost ready for MLB service, but were not figured to make the jump in this year. Harris and Rutschmann will be top tier rookies to collect for next years' product.

I imagine basketball, football, hockey all have similar type processes.

Could be that people just missed adding the RC note. Also note that typical it's the first card that features that player in a set that get the RC note, not all of them. Subset cards, if they come before the regular card, is the exception. 

With Chronicles, it has a lot of subsets. Only main set cards would be considered RCs. Any inserts are not considered RCs, even if they have the logo.

There are 42 RCs in the base set. Parallels, inserts and multiple versions of "rookie" cards (like the 8-12 or so in this base set) do not get RC notation here, even if there's an "RC" shield on the card (and this goes for baseball too). As mentioned, the earliest base card in the set should be designated the "RC", but someone familiar with the set will need to go through again and check it.

It's not the earliest card in the set - it's the base card that's in the set that gets RC designation, not any subset cards. 

Chronicles should be the base; all other "brands" should be considered subsets.  Which means this set's RC notes are a mess.

Looks like all the sets since 2017-18 have been noted with multiple RCs per player, so this may be an even bigger mess.

I think these were easier to deal with in the past where there was an obvious single base set (usually named "Chronicles") with however many cards numbered 1-200 or whatever, and then the other designs like Panini/Select/Prizm/etc. were inserts as they had their own numbering starting over from #1, so it was clear they shouldn't be considered RCs.

These are more confusing because we're talking about a 725-card set with consecutive numbering and multiple players appearing multiple times all in one base set. If we're treating the whole thing as one base set then technically all of those should be noted as RCs, though it's possible there's a rule or exception I don't know about.

I sure wish Panini and Topps wouldn't make things so complicated in terms of their numbering and checklists!

Makes me glad that I don't care if a card is a "true" RC!