A 100 million cap is going to make for some hard decisions after a few seasons. That is the main reason why I want a mid-range cap. I don't want teams loaded with all-stars up and down the lineup every year. If you've got 14 good rookie hitters drafted in the initial draft and they all hit their expensive seasons at the same time you will have to choose which ones to keep and which ones to cut. The turnover of players will be good for future drafts. If you have to cut 5 or 6 good players and replace them with cheap rookies, which is what I'm after, then the league concept is working the way I want it too. In theory, you'll be constantly rebuilding because some of your established players will get too expensive too keep. Kind of like in today's world unless you're the Yankees or Red Sox. Most small market teams can't afford a whole teams worth of expensive superstars. Now, will you have to cut your 3 or 4 top long-term players? Probably not, but if keeping them means losing a short term stud then that will be your choice. As your established players get older and less appealing to keep then the rookies you drafted a few seasons back will be the better option of course.
The more I think about it the less I'm inclined to go the twisting route as well. If you recall, chargingryno the difference between the RPL and this league is that the RPL only used players from the '69 season and reverted everyone back to their rookie season. This league is using players from 60 seasons. There are a lot of rookies that had full, excellent seasons their 1st year in the WIS database. There really is no reason why you couldn't build a competitive team for season 1 right off the bat. If you draft for future seasons then that is your choice and you evidently are planning for that, so why would you leave?