Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Rally Racer (Pro III)
Posts: 5534
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 24 Aug 2017, 1:22 pm

Like the title says.

The new DL10 designation seems to have caused an uptick in the number of players placed on the DL. No surprise there.
User avatar
Posts: 6
Joined: 31 Jan 2017, 4:37 pm

Post 24 Aug 2017, 6:20 pm

I think I'm against this. The league is crazy deep. A 4th slot removes some of the challenge, while simultaneously increasing the number of scrubs

IF we were going to do this, my counter proposal would be to also decrease the starting FAAB some - maybe by $5 or $10. Keeps the challenge level up - managers will have to be more strategic about which guys they REALLY want to DL / be more careful about $ in reserve for when their guys get injured.
Posts: 7
Joined: 19 Jan 2011, 1:12 pm

Post 13 Sep 2017, 10:22 pm

I would be for this... if we could somehow stop people from picking up and stashing DL players from the FA pool.

I'm okay with a DL guy getting picked up on waivers, but there is a lot of times competitive teams have to hold onto a DL guy just so that teams that are completely throwing their season or even a good team that has DL slots open can't pick them up and stash them. For teams that aren't enduring a hardship it's like having a veteran farm system.
User avatar
Posts: 3215
Joined: 02 Oct 2000, 9:01 am

Post 14 Sep 2017, 2:26 pm

Having to make choices is good. It makes things more fun. Hoarding is bad. I will vote NO. In fact, I may suggest and amendment to remove a DL spot. More hard choices=more fun!
Posts: 72
Joined: 22 Apr 2014, 5:27 pm

Post 20 Sep 2017, 10:34 am

Given that we only have four outfielders and keep the free agent pool decently useful for a 16 team league, I'm not sure we need a fourth DL spot. I'd be in favor of a deeper league, but I think there are enough more casual owners that it would make it tougher on them.