MLB 2021

[kolob]

4 hours ago, WSU151 said:

 

While I was searching for images, I found this...was this ST like a year before the switch to the current set? Anyone know?

 

 

Huh. I have no idea, but for as bare as it is ... batting practice jersey?

[FinsUp1214]

That Murphy pic is interesting, I’ve never seen that before.

 

The bridging of eras going on there kind of reminds me of another Braves example: this Phil Niekro (RIP) card with the early 70’s cap and the late 60’s jersey (discernible from what little you can see of the wordmark):

 

[selgy]

4 hours ago, kimball said:

 

Huh. I have no idea, but for as bare as it is ... batting practice jersey?

 

It is up for auction at pristine auction. I dont want to sign up to see if there is any more details about the photo. But here is the link for those who want to know. I did a reverse google search on the image to find it

https://www.pristineauction.com/login?redirect_url=%2Fa2218339-Dale-Murphy-Signed-Atlanta-Braves-11x14-Photo-JSA-COA

[gosioux76]

9 hours ago, selgy said:

 

It is up for auction at pristine auction. I dont want to sign up to see if there is any more details about the photo. But here is the link for those who want to know. I did a reverse google search on the image to find it

https://www.pristineauction.com/login?redirect_url=%2Fa2218339-Dale-Murphy-Signed-Atlanta-Braves-11x14-Photo-JSA-COA

 

I found another online retailer selling a Doyle Alexander version of this jersey and labeling it as a 1987 spring training jersey. 

 

I'm starting to remember this a bit more clearly now. Both the Braves and the Twins rolled out new uniforms that year, but both wore strange hybrids of their new and previous sets during spring training. The Twins wore their navy blue jerseys with the old script and powder blue plants, but with the new "M" logo on the caps. I was only 11 at the time, but I don't recall the Twins ever making a big announcement about new uniforms. They just sort of showed up on opening day. I could be wrong about that. It looks like maybe the Braves did something similar.

 

Regardless, even then I was attuned to even subtle uniform changes, and the "M" cap addition definitely stood out to me. 

 

This is the best image of it I can find:

 

 

[BBTV]

I think that was a thing back then.  The Phillies kept their 1992 rebrand under waps (except for publishing the liberty bell / diamond logo) until opening day.  The players even took BP and infield practice in their maroon gear before changing into the new stuff right before first pitch.  The hybrid part of it is that some players wore their new red shoes through the preseason, presumably to break them in.  So it looked pretty strange.

 

That was also the first year of the batterman on the back of caps, which makes for one of the most rare caps that nobody cares about - a maroon swirl-P cap with the batterman, than was worn only for the 1992 preseason (and sold in stores for a very brief period of time.)

[The_Admiral]

The Rockies are in the same place as the Mariners: tired beyond words, start at "purple team" and dream it up all over again from there.

[SFGiants58]

41 minutes ago, the admiral said:

The Rockies are in the same place as the Mariners: tired beyond words, start at "purple team" and dream it up all over again from there.

“Colorado flag dress-up” might be more popular than “purple team” at this point. I think the Cubs’ existence prevents the team from going all-in on the geometric C motif.

 

But yeah, I’m torn with them. Almost all of my concepts for them are of the “purple team, but ditch everything else” school. But I can appreciate the brand equity they have now.

[WSU151]

Purple, black and silver work the best for them. They just should emphasize the purple and send the black and silver to secondary colors. 

 

I always come back to the 94-99 roads, but take that purple wordmark, outline it in silver, and use black piping for the home and it'd look pretty good.

[gosioux76]

19 minutes ago, the admiral said:

The Rockies are in the same place as the Mariners: tired beyond words, start at "purple team" and dream it up all over again from there.

This is a great point, though I'd argue the Rockies' brand has grown more stale than the Mariners. The serifed wordmark is a '90s relic.  

 

And you're right, start at purple and embrace it. 

[SFGiants58]

57 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

Purple, black and silver work the best for them. They just should emphasize the purple and send the black and silver to secondary colors. 

 

I went through a purple/powder blue phase with my concepts for them, but I moved away from that after realizing the nightmare that color-matching would be. Black, at the very least, gives them one color that is easy to match in multiple applications. The shift to a brighter purple certainly helped things. 

 

57 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

 

I always come back to the 94-99 roads, but take that purple wordmark, outline it in silver, and use black piping for the home and it'd look pretty good.

It’d be tough moving on from the pinstripes, but the pinstripes really don’t fit the team too well. The purple pinstripes don’t read as purple from a distance and with black accessories. The 94-99 road template would be perfect for a home uniform.

[BBTV]

I like most of the Rockies concepts that use purple and green (like the MIL Bucks old set).  Not sure if I'd use black with those colors, but silver would surely work.

[The_Admiral]

The Mighty Ducks' old colors would be perfect for them, odd as they may sound. They're earthy.

[SFGiants58]

4 minutes ago, the admiral said:

The Mighty Ducks' old colors would be perfect for them, odd as they may sound. They're earthy.

The green is too teal, IMHO. The ‘90s-2006 Bucks are more what I’d consider.

 

 

...or the ASG the Rockies hosted.

 

 

I’d rather not include green. It almost necessitates double outlines to not blur with the purple. Look how hard it was for the Jazz to combine the two.

[shstpt1]

2 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

I went through a purple/powder blue phase with my concepts for them, but I moved away from that after realizing the nightmare that color-matching would be. Black, at the very least, gives them one color that is easy to match in multiple applications. The shift to a brighter purple certainly helped things. 

 

We decided to use Purple and Carolina Blue for the travel softball team I coach, and the matching of the Blues are the hardest thing ever. I regret it every now and then and wish we would’ve used a different color with Purple. 

[FiddySicks]

15 hours ago, BBTV said:

I think that was a thing back then.  The Phillies kept their 1992 rebrand under waps (except for publishing the liberty bell / diamond logo) until opening day.  The players even took BP and infield practice in their maroon gear before changing into the new stuff right before first pitch.  The hybrid part of it is that some players wore their new red shoes through the preseason, presumably to break them in.  So it looked pretty strange.

 

That was also the first year of the batterman on the back of caps, which makes for one of the most rare caps that nobody cares about - a maroon swirl-P cap with the batterman, than was worn only for the 1992 preseason (and sold in stores for a very brief period of time.)

Was that the year they used iron on patches for the batterman? I’ve seen those caps before, but I can’t remember which it was. 

[gosioux76]

9 hours ago, FiddySicks said:

Was that the year they used iron on patches for the batterman? I’ve seen those caps before, but I can’t remember which it was. 

 

I bought a lot of hats around that time, just because of the inclusion of batterman. My memory's a bit fuzzy, but I seem to recall the authentic New Era hats having the batterman logos stitched on. I made the mistake of buying a fitted Colorado Rockies hat from a different brand ahead of their inaugural season, and I recall noticing that the batterman logo was applied differently, like an afterthought. Not sure if it was an iron-on or just a patch awkwardly stitched on. I just knew, though, that it was different from the New Era ones. I think the brand I bought, naively, was AJD. 

[FiddySicks]

I think AJD is Shibe Sports now? That’s one I don’t remember too well. New Era was the main producer, but another company called Sports Specialties made some of the on field caps. I had one with the MLB logo on the side of the cap (these weren’t on field models, but made for retail). 

 

The batterman was included at the start of the (I think) 93 season, and all caps that were produced from then forward had the batterman stitched on the back. But New Era had so many hats in their stock from the previous year without the MLB logo on the back. that their solution was to make patches and heat seal the batterman to the back. It didn’t last long, but you can still find a few of them floating around eBay. Some teams are pretty rare and are worth a good amount of money (As BBTV said, that maroon Phillies cap), while others are more common (A’s, Reds). 

[BBTV]

99.9% certain batterman was a 1992 thing since that’s when that maroon hat would have been available. That’s a long time ago so it’s possible I’m not remembering correctly.  I don’t think the current Phillies cap, which debuted in 92, ever existed without it. 

[DCarp1231]

So, I told a friend about the Rockies getting a new uniform. To which his response was,

 

*sigh*
 

”Why? They’re already fire”

 

Every day I lose hope.

[BBTV]

I think liking their current uniforms is a perfectly reasonable stance.  It's not one that I share, but I certainly wouldn't criticize anyone that does.  It's a conservative look with a lot of "classic" elements. Now if someone's saying the Marlins' black mess or Rangers disaster is "fire", I might question their sanity.