Skip to content

Bryce Harper’s Opening Day jersey sold for $13,000 and he’s pissed about it

Apr 19, 2013, 10:00 AM EDT

Major League Baseball took Bryce Harper‘s Opening Day jersey and auctioned it off. Harper was none too pleased that he’d lost a keepsake:

He later tweeted that he hoped the proceeds went to charity. DC Sports Bog spoke to MLB about it and it turns out that, yes, the proceeds do go to charity, so hopefully he’s feeling better about it now.

(h/t to NatsLady, who has supplied me with two Nats-related stories today. Almost feel bad for trolling her about Strasburg’s shutdown last year. Almost).

  1. mybrunoblog - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:08 AM

    Can’t speak for all MLB teams but I know the Yankees own their players jerseys and resell them to a memorabilia company. There is even a shop in Yankee Stadium where you can buy game used jerseys, helmets, bases etc.
    Kind of sucks that Harper can’t keep his jersey but he has about 20 more opening days jerseys in his future that he’ll be able to keep.

    • goskinsvt - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:10 AM

      They do the same in Nats stadium, but I can understand being a little upset as it was his first opening day. Oh well, he can always buy it back I suppose.

      • heyblueyoustink - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:19 AM

        Good point. Unless otherwise specifically mentioned in his contract that he can’t buy his own shirt back.

    • fanofevilempire - Apr 19, 2013 at 12:04 PM

      he is becoming very annoying with his complaining.

  2. saints97 - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:13 AM

    The trials and tribulations of being an MLB star. I’d hate to have to deal with such atrocities.

    • nategearhart - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:56 AM

      And I’m sure homeless people think the same thing about whatever inane shit you happen to bitch about.

      • heyblueyoustink - Apr 19, 2013 at 11:30 AM

        “Do you remember Valentina said “A statement, public and brutal.” “

      • saints97 - Apr 19, 2013 at 12:29 PM

        Which is why you’d never see me publicly bitching about luxuries in life.

      • nategearhart - Apr 19, 2013 at 2:23 PM

        Please, your initial comment was some heavy metabitching (bitching about bitching).
        And was he bitching about luxury? I’m pretty sure he was bitching that someone took his shirt.

  3. awesomenar - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:15 AM

    That’s a clown complaint bro. Just buy it back.

  4. heyblueyoustink - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:20 AM

    In other news, Craig is all of a sudden $13,000 lighter in the wallet and no longer has a need for pajamas.

    • DelawarePhilliesFan - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:27 AM

      Awwwwwww Dammit! 7 minutes too late!!! I don’t care, I am posting my joke anyway…..

      • heyblueyoustink - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:49 AM

        Sorry about that Del, maybe next time i’m in the area, if you’re anywhere near Wilmington, i’ll treat you to lunch at the Blue Parrot

      • DelawarePhilliesFan - Apr 19, 2013 at 1:17 PM

        Blue Parrott – right around the corner from where I work.

        I’ll have to buy, you da’ man on both timing and excecution.

    • historiophiliac - Apr 19, 2013 at 1:11 PM

      BTB, thanks for the mental image of Craig in a nightshirt…

      • heyblueyoustink - Apr 19, 2013 at 3:59 PM

        BTB! Good memory!

      • historiophiliac - Apr 19, 2013 at 4:05 PM

        ;)

  5. DelawarePhilliesFan - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:28 AM

    Craig, did you really need to spend $13,000 on your new pajamas?

    • historiophiliac - Apr 19, 2013 at 10:40 AM

      So nice, I laughed twice.

    • paperlions - Apr 19, 2013 at 12:01 PM

      Yeah, that one is pretty freaking funny. Well done (both of you).

      • DelawarePhilliesFan - Apr 19, 2013 at 1:17 PM

        So we are all agreed then, right? Craig was the buyer

      • paperlions - Apr 19, 2013 at 1:20 PM

        I’ll need to see a pic for confirmation.

  6. b453841l - Apr 19, 2013 at 11:01 AM

    Heartbreaking story. Did they at least let him keep his pants?

  7. 18thstreet - Apr 19, 2013 at 11:11 AM

    I usually side with the players, but doesn’t the uniform belong to the team? The players own their own likeness (which is why they get to sell it to Topps and EA Sports), but is the equipment theirs?

    And if the money is going to charity, it’s hard to see what Harper’s complaint is about.

    • historiophiliac - Apr 19, 2013 at 11:27 AM

      If it weren’t his first opening day, I would agree. They should let him keep that though. Any other game jersey is another story — unless he hits some significant milestone, in which case, he should get to keep it then too (unless he wants to auction it).

      • paperlions - Apr 19, 2013 at 12:03 PM

        Technically, the teams own all of the balls and most of the rest of their equipment as well, but usually players get first dibs on mementos they may want to keep.

        At the very least, the Nats should have asked him if he wanted it, even if they made him donate money to the charity it is supporting.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 19, 2013 at 12:07 PM

        I agree — but I think making him donate to charity is kind of crappy. I mean, the value in it is his own sweat, after all. Anyway, forced giving leads to a moral argument about the purpose of charity and virtuousness and that crap (which I am probably the only one who cares about).

      • paperlions - Apr 19, 2013 at 12:18 PM

        I agree about forced giving. Charity shouldn’t be extortion. While 100% of the value is tied to Harper, it is exactly that value that leads to big contracts. I guess I don’t begrudge teams making money off of player’s sweat as long as a lot of that money is passed on to the players.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 19, 2013 at 12:20 PM

        Surely, they’d get more for his pukey jersey instead. They should let him keep the first one. In this case, Hotlips Harper isn’t getting any money or a momento. That’s some BS, bro.

  8. knowlegeforyou - Apr 19, 2013 at 11:30 AM

    I’m sure he can buy it back

  9. natslady - Apr 19, 2013 at 11:51 AM

    Don’t worry, Craig, there will be plenty of trolling opportunities when the Nats don’t get to the WS and everyone says their once-in-a-century chance was the 2012 season–because Strasburg would have, single-armedly, knocked off the Cards, Giants and Tigers.

    • historiophiliac - Apr 19, 2013 at 12:13 PM

      Grrrrrrrr!

    • rvnc - Apr 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM

      I’m sorry. Strasburg would have made no difference against a Hunter Pence speech.

  10. natslady - Apr 19, 2013 at 11:54 AM

    And that will happen despite everyone picking the Nats to go to the WS in 2013. Yep, Nats going to the WS in 2013, but, wait, 2012 was our only chance. Logic, baby, logic.

  11. DelawarePhilliesFan - Apr 19, 2013 at 1:24 PM

    You know – maybe I have watched “A Few Good Men” too many times (nah….you can’t see that too much), but I can’t stop thinkign of the scene in which Tom Cruise says Private Santiago’s unifoms should be sent to his family, and Keifer Sutherland curtly says “Actually, the uniforms belong to the marine corps”. Somehow I envision MLB pulling a Keifer here

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

A managerial overanalysis epidemic
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. M. Bumgarner (3073)
  2. J. Shields (2889)
  3. T. Lincecum (2590)
  4. T. Ishikawa (2371)
  5. M. Morse (2331)
  1. Y. Cespedes (1997)
  2. B. Roberts (1630)
  3. L. Cain (1628)
  4. B. Posey (1478)
  5. U. Jimenez (1460)