Good question italyprof...and I am happy to take the other owner's guidance on this...my instinct is to just let people use $200K guys if they need them.

If anyone STRONGLY objects to that let me know, in which case we can put it to a vote.

Sorry, one more dumb question:

Why Charlie Knepper 1899 who is after all eligible in this draft and presumably on someone's roster here, as the generic SP for each team if needed? Why not use a pitcher with similar characteristics from an era we are not playing? Or is this group going to be permanent as "The Grateful 8" (movie pun intended) going forward so sooner or later then will each be eligible in their eras anyway?

It's a 1 season overlap. After this season it won't be an issue. We'll use the same 8 every season...

Got pretty unlucky on years, got 18/33 usable players, only 7 pitchers, but most are starters, so innings are good, but PAs at a lot of spots will be a scramble lol

Got 15 players. 1400 pretty decent pitching innings and 4300 decent ABs. A little light on both but we will make it. I never counted on getting Naps huge year...that would have been too easy.

Willie Clark (no 'e'). Has PA in 1899 at 1B. Which doesn't help you since you drew his 1901 season.

OK, I have not checked everyone's roster carefully to see who has enough innings, but just in case, I am going to add the following pitchers to the list of guys that anyone can have:

1894 Adonis Terry (202 IP for the Chicago Colts, $3,735,855)
1890 George Keefe (241 IP, $3,499,279)
1894 Jack Wadsworth (216 IP, $3,333,961)
1890 Ed Green (235 IP, $3,365,899)

Basically enough PAs and IP, pretty mixed quality. Like a real MLB team of that era, in fact.

This is gonna be interesting, good mix of years

Not sure how trades work with the contracts - I'm assuming you can't go over 90 points contract wise...that being said I have 1901 OF - Billy Hamilton (1 year contract) available for trade - I'm looking for a 1 year contract P that's at least decently effective...fielding offers...

You can never go over 90 points, so any trades have to take into account the contract points

Yeah, I already traded notes w/ Coach on the hard contract cap a week ago. I love to make trades but I really think it will be hard to do here because of the cap but also you REALLY have no clue what you are trading for unless it is early in a season. Then you have to wait until the season is decided before you trade in offseason...you have no idea what you are getting or giving for that matter..haahh.. Not whining just another learning. We will figure it out as we go. Seems like eventually we could allow someone to "go for it" in a year but make them underrun or penalize them the following to make up....so its their choice.

C23 has done an great job here but it will be bumpy from time to time..that makes it fun.

Offense turned out better than expected. 19 players with 10,000 PA
Pitching staff got decimated. 5 pitchers with 1297 IP. Lets hope Charlie Knepper has a good year for me.

The_Creeper and I see the situation very differently when it comes to trades, but that's part of what's interesting about this experiment; it's forcing each of us to rethink our traditional progressive paradigms.

With regards to trades, without (I hope) giving anything away, I'll just point out a few things:
-- The rules allow you to allocate fewer than 90 cap points (I'm surprised I'm the only one who did this) which gives you an in-season buffer if you want to make an unbalanced trade
-- The rules also allow for numerous players on the roster who don't count against the cap (the "available to all" guys, the $200K guys, any SIM-generated AAA). So if you're contending you might well decide to trade the 3 CP guy (for whom you don't have a great draw this season) for 3 guys with 1 CP each. The person trading away the 3 CP guy can include 2 of his scrub players to make the rosters work out.
-- I actually expect that's where we will see a LOT of trades...guys with 1 season left on their contracts in a season when you aren't contending. We'll see if I'm right.
-- Lastly, there is a provision to have one team agree to pay for some of the contract of a guy they are trading away...we'll see how often this gets used.

I am definitely not in favor of any rule change to allow teams to go over the cap, and will almost certainly vote no on any such proposal, but if at some point someone wants to propose something for the league to vote on, go for it.

C23...you have done a phenomenal job. These rules force us to think. I can only speak for me and likely from the traditional paradigm but given the first season and not knowing what to expect, I really didnt have the luxury of hoping I wouldnt need all my points....so I used them. I agree, going forward I will want to give myself some flexibility and will be building some models now that I know what I have (even if no idea on season) but that was just too much risk in the initial season. Just my opinion. I actually think having that pool of extra guys also may factor in more than folks are thinking.

Bigger point for me to date with this project. You are responsive, you are decisive and clarify when necessary. I hope all the feedback continues to be received in this manner and some owner (probably other than me) will come up with a great idea to improve and the league can evaluate and implement if it makes sense....Im just along for the ride and shouting out the window....hahahahah.