From The Pedro Binder

2001 Donruss Class of 2001

I don't know what to think.

My first impression is that the card looks choppy. It feels like it's broken into a bunch of pieces. The picture. The red arc on the left. The white arc on the bottom right. The red arc in the corner. The baseball on the bottom. Nothing seems to flow together. It's all visually disjointed.

It's not really my cup of tea.

But, Donruss probably didn't care about that. This was just a set to be put out at the very end of the year to try and capture some hot rookies in another card set. And, of course, they tossed in some start to make it worth out while. Like Pedro here.

Because there is nothing special about this card. It could be any other card made that year. It's just a way to pump out as many cards as humanly possible.

So, I suppose they succeeded. I have this card now.

But it's not a great one.

From the Pedro Binder

2000 Skybox Dominion Double Play

If I was another card company in 2000, I'd be annoyed with this set. Skybox basically took ownership on the name "double play" for an insert set, and completely blew it. Now Topps can't name an insert set "double play" and make it a clever reference to, I don;t know, a double play? Or, someone turns a double play? Or, maybe two of something?

But, no. Here we have one pitcher throwing a ball. Maybe he's trying to induce a double play? That's probably a stretch. Besides, it's Pedro. What are the odds there was a man on base when this picture was taken?

It immediately leaves me with a sour, uninspired taste in my mouth. They clearly just wanted more cards with Pedro on them, and grabbed whatever random baseball sounding term they could to name the set.

The card itself? Pretty standard. Pedro, with some crazy graphics behind him. They did make the logo for "double play" that dp thing where each letter looks like the other. Not exactly the connection I was looking for.

What a disappointment.

From the Pedro Binder

2000 HoloGrFx

Yup. It's another HoloGrfx card, which means there is a ton of sizzle. And, I mean a TON!

But, really, why is it there? Just to be shiny? Just because it can be? The card is actually pretty dull. It's a fairly solid red card, with a tiny picture of Pedro. They even shoved the picture as far to one side as they could, apparently to leave even more room for the red.

The information? Yup. It's as tiny as humanly possible. Who cares what the player's name is? Or their team? Or what position they play? Who cares about that when we can give you this shiny red card!?!

Blech.

From the Pedro Binder

2003 Victory

Usually when I do these posts, I only show the front of the card. I figure that's the important part. It's also usually the most interesting. In this case I decided to show both sides. Not because I think they both deserve to be displayed.

But because I can't really decide which one is the front.

By all accounts, the top picture should be the back. He has all the characteristics of a card back. It has the number. It has statistics. It has the logos and copyright information. It just screams "back."

But...the other side doesn't exactly scream "front" does it?

It has this tiny picture. It has this colorful design. It has a logo and a name. 

This does not look like a place the company expect me to focus my attention. 

The card has rounded corners, like a playing card. And, that's the impression I get when looking at the card "front." It has the feel of a playing card back. I expect to flip the card over and see and ace.

Which, of course, is exactly what I do with this card.

So, maybe that is supposed to be the back? I'm so confused.

What do you think?

From the Pedro Binder: 2000 Victory

I can't decide of Upper Deck got lucky with this one.

There are a number of things I don't like about this card. Basically, taken on their own, I hate most everything about this card. I hate using an entire corner as a black box to display information. I hate the repeat of the main picture as the corner picture. I hate the jarring red tone to the corner picture. 

But, I like how the main picture is a nice tall image. Set apart from the rest of the card, it seems to work. An image that wasn't so lanky would have trouble standing out in the layout it was doomed into. But this one, this great picture of Pedro ready to deliver hell on earth, just works. I also like the border paint treatment given to the image. It gives it a quality that I just can't put my finger on, but enjoy.

I don't know how they do it. But, I don't hate this card. Oh, I don't love it. Don't get me wrong. But, it's not all bad.

I guess they got lucky.

From the Pedro Binder

1999 Topps Stars

Yup. It was the nineties.

A simple picture of the best pitcher in at least a generation would't do. It had to have pizzaz! It had to have flair. There would need to be foil stamping. Lots of it! There would need to be some sort of alteration to the picture. Maybe ever an gold glow around Pedro himself. (OK. That part is pretty cool.) Because, why would anyone buy a baseball card that was just a baseball card?

Once again, I get it. Topps had the base set. That's where people get a clean picture on a simple border. They also had Stadium Club. In that set, the picture is everything. The rest of the card is almost designed to just get out of the way. So, I understand that those sets cover the basics. Sets like Topps Stars are their chance to have a little fun. To go after a different audience.

I hope that audience liked this card. Because, as you might expect, it doesn't do much for me.

It's a card like this that makes me wonder what a card collector is. People who just amass any piece of cardboard with a player pictured on it? Because this card doesn't even list Pedro's team on the front. It's a completely computer created picture that does very little to capture the essence of Pedro.

Is that all we're after? If it is, this card probably has a niche. But, it makes me feel a bit dirty about my collection.

I really will buy anything, eh?

From the Pedro Binder

2000 Skybox Metal

There is one thing that could make this card work. If it was, you know, actually metal. But, alas, it is not. 

Instead, Skybox just wants to give you the illusion that the card is a dull metallic gray. So, they took what would otherwise be a pretty decent card, and blurred it up to make it look metal.

Why on earth would you do that?

Because, look at that great design, if you could see any of it. The Skybox logo is so small that it's practically invisible. The Metal logo is almost as hidden. Pedro's name is nice and bold right across the top of the card. No tilting required to read it. His team, position, and even number are clearly written right under the name. Clear as day.

That leaves plenty of room for the picture to come front and center. Sure, the picture is pretty basic. But it's well cropped, and has everything you'd want in a picture of Pedro delivering a strike.

Then they had to go muck it up my making the card look metallic.

And it's not even metal.

From the Pedro Binder

2003 Playoff Absolute Memorabilia

Wow.

There is just so much going on here.

First, the name of the set is terrible. It has nothing to do with memorabilia. There isn’t a piece of anything in the card. The picture doesn’t feature a specific piece of Pedro’s memorabilia. It’s just a name in order to be a name. Terrible.

Beyond that, I don’t know what to make of the front of the card. ‘ve been staring at the blurry splotches in the background for a little bit too long trying to decide if they’re supposed to be something. A crowd shot, perhaps. But, I can’t come up with anything They’re just splotches.

To be fair, the card does have a nice shine that doesn’t show up at all in the scan. So, those bizarre rectangles all over the place aren’t quite as noticeable. But, they’re still noticeable.

And still pointless.

Apparently Playoff really wanted us to know that card was from 2003. That’s nice of them, really, since with the 36,000 brands that were produced around then, it’s almost impossible to keep track of which design goes with which year. But, isn’t it enough to have the year in the logo? Does it need to be right in the middle of the card as well?

Why is Pedro’s name tucked on the side facing out? 

The actual picture of Pedro is actually a nice one. Pedro getting ready to deal another blow to a batter’s ego. But, there’s so much other stuff going on, you can barely notice.

So confusing.

From the Pedro Binder

1999 Upper Deck

Not bad. Not great, but not bad.

First, once again my scanner has been taking matters into its own hands when it comes to cropping cards. Apparently it feels that the right border needs to be narrower.

I’m not entirely sure I disagree. That’s really the thing that bothers me the most about this card. The foil borders. I don’t really know what the problem with them is, but it’s there. It’s actually a pretty nice design with the rippling effect. It does draw the eye to the large picture in the middle of the card. If it was simply a design, it would be much better. But, as foil it really does the opposite. While the design of the foil guides me towards the picture, I can’t take it off the foil itself.

I do like the bottom of the card. The fact that the picture can be seen through the opaque red coloring is fantastic. It allows the team name to be printed on a more solid background, but still allow the picture to display its whole glory.

But, that darn foil.

The picture is nice too. Certainly nothing revolutionary. But, I love the look on Pedro as he’s just about to deliver a pitch. Like impending doom.

If Upper Deck did an Opening Day type foil-less version, I think I’d like that a lot.

This, I don’t.

From the Pedro Binder

1999 HoloGrFx

Which one screams "'90s insert!" more, the crazy colors, or the lack of vowels in the brand name?

Honestly this is the type of card that makes me question the whole baseball card hobby. 

What exactly does it mean to collect cards? Is it because you want to have a picture of your favorite players as a remembrance of their season? Does this qualify? It's a flashy background with a cut-out of Pedro stuck on it. 

Oh, sure. I suppose you could say it's just a modern version of 1954 Topps. Instead of a solid color background, though, they kept up with the times and made it foil.

I don't say that though.

It just says "pointless" to me. What was the need for this set? What does it bring to the table that the other 36 million sets issued in 1999 didn't? Foil? Colors? Nope.

So, even though it really has most things I look for in a card, I just can't stand it. I look past the name, and the team name, and even Pedro's number. I just can't get past the uselessness of it all. 

It pains me that it's in the binder.

From the Pedro Binder

1998 Collectors Choice Silver

Collector’s Choice cards are supposed to be fun. They don’t take themselves as seriously as the real, premium, Upper Deck cards. They’re a little bit more whimsical. Which is nice. I like some whimsy in my collection.

You can see that in the design. There are some sweeping lines in there, just for fun. Some color graphics. This card happens to be the silver version, so the borders don’t allow the colors to pop as well as a white border would. But, it’s still a lot of fun.

There’s one thing that bothers me with this card, though.

No, it’s not the design. After all, it has the player’s name easy to read in the lower right corner. Perfect. There’s a team logo, and a position. That’s just great.

It’s not the picture, either. Sure, it’s obviously a studio shot. But, this was Pedro’s first year with the Sox. I think I’d prefer a nice studio shot over a photoshopped picture. And, this is a nice studio shot. For me, it works.

No, what bothers me is the bizarre All-Star logo in the upper right. It proudly declares that Pedro is a member of the 1997 CC All-Stars for the NL. I’m assuming that the “S” stands for “starter.” While that’s odd, since I assume that everyone on the team was a starter as opposed to a bench player, it’s not the problem. For some reason, the fact that Pedro’s on the NL team bothers me. This is a Red Sox card, celebrating his NL accomplishment. It seems like there’s a mismatch there.

Now, I’ll be honest, I’m not sure what I’d want Upper Deck to do about this problem. Since it’s their own all-star team, they could have just left Pedro off. It’s not like they were documenting something with their cards. Just pick a starter who was in the NL in 1997 and 1998. It would have seemed a bit odd to ignore the Cy Young winner, though. They could have put him on the AL team. But, to be fair, he wasn’t in the AL in 1997. They could have just left off the NL. Then, he’d still be celebrated…but not with an odd looking designation.

Or, I suppose, they could just count of the fact that most people aren’t as odd as I am, and wouldn’t care that it said NL on a Red Sox card.

It just seems weird to me.

From the Pedro Binder

2003 UD Top 40

My scanner did a number on this card. But, I’m sure you can get the general idea. The card has a graphic design of…the number 40.

Clever.

Once again, all the information I want in a card is there. There’s a picture of Pedro. His name is there along with his team and position. It even lists his uniform number. Of course, it would be better if that information wasn’t in that annoying foil that card companies make you read.

But what about the design? I’m conflicted. It’s actually a pretty clean look. The picture of Pedro doesn’t have to compete too much with banners or graphics. I think my main problem with this card is that the picture is just too small. If I had a whole bunch of these cards of different players in a binder, I think it would look too much like I had the same card over and over. The size of the picture wouldn’t draw me in. Now, some people might actually like that part the best. There would be a consistency there. But, for me, the focus should be on the picture. I don’t collect cards with graphics on them. I collect cards with Pedro Martinez on them. He should actually be prominent on the card.

Despite that, I think I’ve decided that I like this card. (As if you really cared.)

OK Jere…I’m waiting

From the Pedro Binder

2002 Leaf Certified

So Shiny.

Sometimes, a card is just busy for the sake of being busy. I understand that there are only so many ways you can dress up a rectangle with design elements. But, do you need to use all your options on one card all at once? We have circles, lines, foil, and polka dots.

Phew.

Some of my issue with this card is that I will always prefer a good picture to a good design. I would like it more if Pedro wasn’t cut off at the knees. But, frankly, the card has all the requirements I look for in a card. The team name, player name, and position are right there on the front. They’re all tough to read, though. The “Boston” on the side is excusable since it’s the least important of the three. The card even has the bonus of a team logo, and player number on the front as well. That’s a pretty informative card. But, to put the player name in small print over a spotted background? That’s just mean. The position they place in a clean white circle. The player’s name? You’re on your own.

The picture itself is even really nice. Zoomed in close to focus on Pedro, staring in at the batter before embarrassing him. The card has a ton of stuff going for it.

I just can’t get past all the distractions.