Rawlings PRO-10CMOT

This is an archive section - it is read only

Rawlings PRO-10CMOT

Postby jsalinas » January 19th, 2009, 5:22 pm

This is the mitt I got a while back. Nice condition.

I'm looking to sell it. Maybe $150. I thought about re-lacing it, I figured that it is worth more with the factory lace.

Image

Image

Image
jsalinas
Veteran Glove Poster
 
Posts: 149
Joined: November 10th, 2008, 6:48 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

Postby jsalinas » January 23rd, 2009, 10:42 pm

$140? Anyone?
jsalinas
Veteran Glove Poster
 
Posts: 149
Joined: November 10th, 2008, 6:48 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

Postby No-Lite-Toe » January 23rd, 2009, 11:28 pm

That is without a doubt a quality mitt. If it just didn't have the lite-toe portion. Since they started making those, to me, it spoiled the look of catchers mitts. I love the era of pre- lite-toes. Good luck. :)
No-Lite-Toe
Veteran Glove Poster
 
Posts: 78
Joined: April 27th, 2008, 1:00 am
Location: Hackensack NJ

Postby jsalinas » January 24th, 2009, 12:36 pm

I have to agree. That branding could have been elsewhere.

I got it a few weeks ago and am hoping to sell it this Spring. We'll see.
jsalinas
Veteran Glove Poster
 
Posts: 149
Joined: November 10th, 2008, 6:48 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

Postby drzubia8 » January 24th, 2009, 4:17 pm

what is the purpose of a lite toe?
"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts" - Earl Weaver
User avatar
drzubia8
Veteran Glove Poster
 
Posts: 150
Joined: May 15th, 2008, 9:50 pm

Postby oakfan33 » January 25th, 2009, 2:54 am

I believe the Lite-Toe portion of a catcher's mitt was designed to help with the scooping of pitches that were thrown in the dirt. Instead of bouncing off the once thick padding there, it acts more like a regular glove when scooping balls out of the dirt.
oakfan33
Veteran Glove Poster
 
Posts: 63
Joined: October 6th, 2007, 1:16 am
Location: Visalia, CA

Postby No-Lite-Toe » January 25th, 2009, 3:35 am

Oakfan is right. That is the general purpose of the lite-toe. Pretty much the same principle of the very well designed first baseman's mitt. But the catchers mitt cannot be the same as the first baseman's because it needs to be more thick and durable all the way around to protect the catchers hand, particularly fingers and thumb from wicked fouled-back tips. Or even wicked pitches! Which brings to mind the very early catchers mitts of the 20's 30's and 40's that were made like pillows with the pocket area the same size as the ball. Catchers back then literally had to use two hands to catch pitches using those mitts which made the throwing hand vunerable to foul-back tips. Interesting. Anyway back to the lite-toe. My contention is, if a catcher needs to scoop a pitch out of the dirt he's already in an adverse situation. As long as he can get the mitt on the ball and keep it in front of him to keep base runners stayed put, he's done his job. I don't think scooping could do much better. So, somebody around thirty years ago came up with the lite-toe idea. As a result I think it's safe to say all catchers mitts are virtually made with the lite-toe. The only glove/mitt on the field that took on a noticeble change. I would think doc could shed some light on this.
No-Lite-Toe
Veteran Glove Poster
 
Posts: 78
Joined: April 27th, 2008, 1:00 am
Location: Hackensack NJ


Return to Archive - Modern Glove Information

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron