Posted by tecwrg on 6/1/2012 10:24:00 AM (view original):
Any time you have to make do with less resources, it's inherently more complicated.

I disagree with that blanket statement, as I don't think it is that black and white.   First off, currenlty demotion penalities decrease, but do not eliminate the full use of your 40 man roster.    Removing the demotion penalty would remove any barriers and would no doubt increase the practice.  However, consider the fact that if the barrier was removed it would open up another faucet of the game that would require a equivalent amount of resource management.  You would have to decide, do I spend $3mm on those two guys left in free agency to bounce back and forth between the bullpen as needed, or do I go after that $6mm stud releiver instead?    Or wow, look that low dur hitting machine that no one normally would have signed, now has a bidding war for him in free agency...do I want to invest my money in him now that the market has deemed he is worth more?    Do I want to have a bunch of guys at AAA who have their clock ticking?   Or how about that jack wagon who just joined the league, put his salary budget at max, put everything else at 6, overspent on every free agent, and is trying to buy his way to a title?   My team that I have spent 6 season building through the draft and IFA, and has a very strong minor league system, now can fully utilize my strengths against this one season and gone jackass. 

Again, letting us fully utilize our 40 man roster (and let's be realisitc here, we are only talking about a few players...maybe 30 usable players at most), would more accurately reflect real life (yes I know this is a game and not real life), and would reward the people who play this game properly.   it would add an extra layer of strategy and, yes, resource management.    Its not dumbing down the game in my opinion.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/1/2012 10:21:00 AM (view original):
Making decisions based on a bigger roster doesn't make things more complicated to me.   Why not just have 40 man BL rosters?  40 max/20 min.

You are right, not more complicated, but not less either, just different.    You are taking the arguement to the extreme.  You obviously can't have a 40 man max ML roster, as each game takes place in a vacuum, and have 15 extra players available to pinch hit, sub in, and releive is silly.  

Posted by boogerlips on 6/1/2012 11:03:00 AM (view original):
What the heck is a fighting artichoke?

Scottsdale Community College.   Short version:  The students decided to protest some athletic budget(maybe they were just getting into athletics) when the administration decided to put the name/mascot up for a vote.   They ended up with the Fighting Artichokes as the nickname.

Don't you have google?

Posted by ranger717 on 6/1/2012 11:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/1/2012 10:21:00 AM (view original):
Making decisions based on a bigger roster doesn't make things more complicated to me.   Why not just have 40 man BL rosters?  40 max/20 min.

You are right, not more complicated, but not less either, just different.    You are taking the arguement to the extreme.  You obviously can't have a 40 man max ML roster, as each game takes place in a vacuum, and have 15 extra players available to pinch hit, sub in, and releive is silly.  

So how would it be OK to have an extra 15 available every 10 games?

To put it another way, I'd extend my pitchers a bit more.   Now, I need my SP to be ready every 5th day and set their PC accordingly.   If I know I can send my 0 fatigue pitchers down, I'll stretch 'em out a bit more.    Even if my position player strategy never changed without demotion penalties, my pitching staff would move for 12-13 pitchers to 16-17 easily.   Those 32/12 DUR/STM guys with great other numbers would always have a spot on my staff.

Hell, my 25 man roster make-up would be completely different.   I'd carry 8 pitchers from day to day(pretty similar to my playoff roster) and a bunch of specialty position players.    Guys who can steal or play D or hit for power and not much else.   Someone I'd need for 1 AB or inning in the field.   No demotion penalty changes the game entirely.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/1/2012 1:21:00 PM (view original):
To put it another way, I'd extend my pitchers a bit more.   Now, I need my SP to be ready every 5th day and set their PC accordingly.   If I know I can send my 0 fatigue pitchers down, I'll stretch 'em out a bit more.    Even if my position player strategy never changed without demotion penalties, my pitching staff would move for 12-13 pitchers to 16-17 easily.   Those 32/12 DUR/STM guys with great other numbers would always have a spot on my staff.

Assuming you have the top 5 starting pitchers as your main starting pitchers, you are going to extend them so that they can't pitch every 5th day just to get a guy that couldn't make the opening roster some starts?  Seems like a bad stratagy to me, and highly unlikely.     Let's say you have 6 great starting pitchers...you still aren't going to shuffle the 6th best one back and forth from the minors, you are going to have him as a releiver on the regular ML squad.   The bottom line is that the extra pitchers you have in AAA that you MIGHT want to shuffle back and forth, aren't going to be that great or they would already be on the ML squad.  If you do have a great one in AAA and would get an advantage out of shuffling him, then GREAT, then do it.  You have been smart, managed your team wisely, have extra depth in your minors, and it will help you.  Great I say.

You say your pitching staff would move from 12-13 to 16-17 pitchers?  I say then you are probably hurting yourself more than helping if you are using guys that aren't that great so much at the ML level.   Instead if you have loaded your AAA with studs, then you probalby paid through the nose for it...which is just another strategy that involves the allocation of resources.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/1/2012 1:23:00 PM (view original):
Hell, my 25 man roster make-up would be completely different.   I'd carry 8 pitchers from day to day(pretty similar to my playoff roster) and a bunch of specialty position players.    Guys who can steal or play D or hit for power and not much else.   Someone I'd need for 1 AB or inning in the field.   No demotion penalty changes the game entirely.

And those speciality position players that used to go for pennies on the free agency market, are now a lot more expensive.  And if they are speciality players you brought up through your system, then you have started their clock ticking sooner, and will eventually have to pay for it or lose them.  Eventually the marketplace will balance it out.  Change isn't always bad if if makes the game better.

You're assuming everyone will have the same depth and ability to utilize 40 instead of 25.    Probably not true. 

As for pitching, my top 5-6 probably wouldn't change.   The other 10-12 would.    There's no reason to worry about keeping that 73 non-fatigue in the bigs when a 71 is in AAA.    The D-spec price wouldn't change.   I use them now, on a more limited basis, until they ask for 1m.   Then I rotate the next group in.

Change isn't always bad.   But there's a reason rosters are 25 and not 40.

An example:
Bottom of BL staff:
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Billy Arnold
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Oleg Duncan
Top of AAA staff:
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Carlos Abreu
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Tom Frye

They look pretty interchangeable to me.   Without demotion penalties, I don't hesitate to bounce all 4 between BL and AAA.

Well, we will just have to agree to disagree here.   The things you are saying are bad I say are good.  I'm not assuming that everyone will have the same depth.  I'm saying that everyone won't have the same depth and that's good.      If you have built a team with low priced quality talent in your minors, and want to rotate them in and out then that should be a viable strategy.  That strategy will have benefits and disadvantages over the long term. 

I sitll can't image a scenario where you would have 17 pitchers that you would trust to pitch at the major league level that you would be shuffling back and forth....that seems to be taking the arguement to the extreme.  I can see having 1 or 2, maybe 3 pitchers in the minors that you might trust at the ML level.     If they are expensive, then are you have choosen to make that resource allocation.  If they are low dur/stam studs then the free agency market has most likely increased their cost over what they are now.   If they are cheap, then they probably aren't very good.  Or if they are cheap young players you have brought up, then likely it is a short term situation and they will eventually be ML regulars, and their clock has just started ticking...a choice you have made which involves an allocation of future salary resources.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/1/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):
An example:
Bottom of BL staff:
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Billy Arnold
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Oleg Duncan
Top of AAA staff:
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Carlos Abreu
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Tom Frye

They look pretty interchangeable to me.   Without demotion penalties, I don't hesitate to bounce all 4 between BL and AAA.

Okay.  So what's the problem with that?  Everyone else can do the same thing.  These are not game changers we are dealing with here.

Well, my staff is 12 in the example above.  Those two bring it to 14.   These two are in AAA making BL money but not on my 40:
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Alving Nieves
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Julian Harris
That's 16.

I've got over 2m in cap space and this guy is an unsigned FA asking for 630k:
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Phillip Baker

That's 17.    Is there a discernible difference between the two on my BL roster, the two in AAA on the 40, the two making BL money in AAA but not on the 40 and the 630k FA?    Rotating the 11th/12th spots on my BL staff between those 7 would make tons of sense. 

Posted by ranger717 on 6/1/2012 1:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/1/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):
An example:
Bottom of BL staff:
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Billy Arnold
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Oleg Duncan
Top of AAA staff:
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Carlos Abreu
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Tom Frye

They look pretty interchangeable to me.   Without demotion penalties, I don't hesitate to bounce all 4 between BL and AAA.

Okay.  So what's the problem with that?  Everyone else can do the same thing.  These are not game changers we are dealing with here.

If rosters were 40 every day, everyone would be able to do that, right?   You thought that was crazytalk.

Seems to me that those pitchers are B and mop up pitchers.  So my questions would be:

1)  Are you running into fatigue problems with those pitchers, when they are the last one's out of your bullpen?
2)  Are you gettting any real tangible benefit from interchanging those pitchers? 
3)  Would any perceived tangible benefit outweight the additional immediate and future salary expenditures?

I think you are over estimating how much you would utilize those two in AAA, and the amount of benefit you would get.

As for Baker, if everyone could utilize this strategy, he wouldn't be available.