Far from unpredictable...

You can predict going into a series that team A will struggle to get on base vs team B's starters, but will run wild on the bases if they get there....

You can predict that Team C, which is all sluggers, is going to have a hard time scoring against team D, which has a bunch of very low HR/9 rates and is playing in the Astrodome.

In short... You get the results that you could reasonably expect to occur in real life.  Variables impact game outcomes and randomness occurs in small sample sizes, but the basic script follows as expected. 

Unpredictable, to me, are the $255m leagues.... Is my Pedro/Ruth/Williams/Bonds team going to beat your Pedro/Ruth/Williams/Bonds team.... To me, it's all random in those leagues.

Low caps don't fill easily because it's not as much fun playing with a roster of nobodies, no escapism.

biglenr, I think you misunderstood what I meant about unpredictable.  I was talking about players that are selected and their performance in low cap leagues.  I was recently in 2 tocs.  The number of teams that had Joss,Dilone, and a tons of other cookies is totally unbelievable.  It simply is very predictable.  The deadball pitchers dominate the staffs and the wins.  The same guys dominate in hitting.  The outcomes can be predicted because of players used.  In low cap leagues a variety of new guys, combinations, and rosters make the game unpredictable because owners need to manage rosters more in my opinion.  I can't stand deadball guys.  I can't stand cookies like a Howard Johnson.  The low caps can force other choices.  That is what makes them an adventure. That is why people should try them for a change.  They may never play something else.

SpotSell, a roster of nobodies? You haven't tried low-caps have you? My current low-cap team has Tom Seaver, Francisco Coredero, Wade Boggs, Willie McGee and bunches more of .300 hitters. The key is how many big stat heroes you are going to try and manage for 60-mil, because there will be trade-offs. Granted, every position won't be an All-Star, but that's not realistic anyway.  

Posted by SpotSell on 5/2/2014 5:03:00 PM (view original):
Low caps don't fill easily because it's not as much fun playing with a roster of nobodies, no escapism.

I think your comment ties back to my post earlier SpotSell...there is a distinct group of owners on this site who want to play best of the best WIS baseball and see what happens, and that's why we have so many high cap leagues. But then I don't understand why these same people get on the forums and complain about how broken WIS is because it's not "realistic" to have batter X hit .190 .250 .280 when in real life he hit .320 .420 .550 or have pitcher X be 0-6 with a 9.00 ERA and a 2.00 WHIP.

That's what happens at higher cap leagues. That's part of the "escapism" scenario of playing at that cap.

There are many owners on this site who are looking for "realism" instead of "escapism". This is why so many owners play progressives. But, with as many owners who say that the site isn't realistic, and with as many owners who play progressives, it still boggles my mind that low caps that are certainly going to be more "realistic" with roster construction, management need, strategy and results, are not more popular.

Maybe the marketing speak on the home page of "Babe Ruth vs Nolan Ryan" or "Walter Johnson vs Barry Bonds" permeated everyone's minds and that is all they want to play...escapism isn't bad after all. I just wish that more owners who are seeking realism on this site played in the low caps.

Just to put in my 2 cents, Len Swormstedt and Harry Niles are now 2 of my favorite players of all time.  

A testament to the accuracy of low caps providing realism....I used the1961 Roger Maris 61 homer season on my low cap team recently just to see how he would do... After a slow start, he wound up hitting 59. In an earlier season when I used him in a high cap league, he was virtually useless. I won't play in leagues over 100 million cap, and even then I get some "weird" stats from some players.