DL spots

[Yah Mule]

1. No DL, but expand reserves to 10, draft seven, add last three via FAAB with no drops

Pool penetration is around 62 percent, leaving plenty of free agents. Sure, they're not the quality we're used to, but it's relative. Remember, this game originally called for 12 team AL or NL only rosters, that's 74 percent penetration, without reserves. Add six reserves and it's 93 percent.

2. Keep Monday moves for everyone and Friday moves for hitters, then allow discretionary moves for any reason for $20 FAAB.

At most, a team could do 50 moves, fewer than two a week and spend no FAAB.

I do not like the expanded bench idea at all, I think 7 is an ideal number, BUT I love suggestion number 2, because it adds another dynamic layer of strategy! Brilliant

Number two has as much chance of being enacted as Pickoff Attempts becoming an official category.

[KJ Duke]

The aim would be to help teams with multiple injuries at the same time

What’s the justification for “helping teams”?
You want a safety net for managers who draft injury prone players?

It sounds like you want to take away the skill from the game and turn it into a lottery.

Your logic is assbackwards. Injuries are primarily a luck component other than the few that are hurt going into draft day and an obvious group of high-risk players. Reducing injury impact reduces luck component, which by deduction increases skill component.

I can understand why bad players might not like reducing luck as it limits their chances of beating better players, but's let's not mis-characterize this into the opposite of what it is.

[Deadheadz]

The aim would be to help teams with multiple injuries at the same time

What’s the justification for “helping teams”?
You want a safety net for managers who draft injury prone players?

It sounds like you want to take away the skill from the game and turn it into a lottery.

Your logic is assbackwards. Injuries are primarily a luck component other than the few that are hurt going into draft day and an obvious group of high-risk players. Reducing injury impact reduces luck component, which by deduction increases skill component.

I can understand why bad players might not like reducing luck as it limits their chances of beating better players, but's let's not mis-characterize this into the opposite of what it is.

The point isn’t that fluke injuries need to be mitigated. The point is that any rule change will be exploited by some managers. In this case adding DL slots will give a safety net to those who choose to draft injury prone players.

If you choose to take the risk of drafting a Mets pitcher, you choose to accept the consequences.

[KJ Duke]

Your logic is assbackwards. Injuries are primarily a luck component other than the few that are hurt going into draft day and an obvious group of high-risk players. Reducing injury impact reduces luck component, which by deduction increases skill component.

I can understand why bad players might not like reducing luck as it limits their chances of beating better players, but's let's not mis-characterize this into the opposite of what it is.

The point isn’t that fluke injuries need to be mitigated. The point is that any rule change will be exploited by some managers. In this case adding DL slots will give a safety net to those who choose to draft injury prone players.

If you choose to take the risk of drafting a Mets pitcher, you choose to accept the consequences.

Met-like pitchers get dropped when they get hurt because they are heading for TJ or shoulder surgery, stashing one of them on a limited emergency-like DL would have no helpful impact. However, having Sal Perez tear his knee carrying luggage, Bumgarner break his pinky on a GB, Turner get plunked, Zunino and Flowers and a dozen others straining an oblique ... all of these things add up to bad luck. And when one team accumulates 2 or 3 or 4 of them at a time they are put in a huge hole versus an otherwise potentially worse-drafted team that happened to get lucky and not own any of these players.

Permamant DL slots or even deeper benches may reward an owner who drafts and stashes or drafts high risk players, but having a limited number of DL weeks for the owner that gets crushed by injuries is simply allowing them to continue to have a chance to compete without having to give away an otherwise undroppable player to one of the luckier, healthier teams.

[Gekko]

i'm in the camp of no DL spots. owners need to make tough decisions. this would reward owners who take "health risk" types of players and lessen the FAAB pool even more. bad all around IMO

[Rog]

I am still a firm believer of no DL spots
Trying to set my friday lineup has pina as missing a day or 2.
My other catcher is D'naurd
My bench is as follows
Schebler
Lamb
Knebel
Shoemaker
Bumgarner(SELF INFLICTED)
Trumbo(SELF INFLICTED)
WHEN I MOVE D'naurd to the bench that will be 7 roster spots for 7 Dl'ed players.
Very hard to recover from bad drafting when a little of bad luck comes your way.
I LOVE THIS SHIT.

[Bjs2025]

I'm not a proponent of going off of "feelings" but it really seems as if there are far more injuries right now than any time I can remember. Maybe it is because of the 10 day DL and players actually being placed on the DL rather than being "day to day." Someone less lazy than me should do an analysis on DL stint amounts through the first 3 weeks of each season.

[Yah Mule]

I'm not a proponent of going off of "feelings" but it really seems as if there are far more injuries right now than any time I can remember. Maybe it is because of the 10 day DL and players actually being placed on the DL rather than being "day to day." Someone less lazy than me should do an analysis on DL stint amounts through the first 3 weeks of each season.

2014 felt like the first 20 minutes of Saving Private Ryan to me.

[Brian Jenner]

I'm 100% against DL spots. The Free Agents are already somewhat limited in a 15-team league, if you remove the top 30 players from the free agent pool, the options would be even more limited.

Easy solution for that: remove 2 reserve spots and create 2 (or more) DL spots. Then you still have the same, if not more, usable players in the free agent pool. Healthy teams get 5 reserves to work with, teams loaded with injuries get 7 (or more) to work with. This isn't complicated; it's how 99% of fantasy leagues outside of the NFBC are run. Being different isn't always a good thing! I'm in favour of removing luck whenever it's feasible to do so. And I'm generally not in favour of maintaining rules simply due to inertial reasoning. This seems very straightforward.

Gotta say, having Suarez, Lamb, Bogaerts, Gyorko, Sal Perez, and Daniel Murphy all on the DL in my Auction Championship team really degrades the experience, and it's purely due to bad luck other than Murphy, who was a calculated risk. This isn't even mentioning the 3 pitchers who have each gotten injured in the past week.

I'd be in favour of having 4 or 5 DL spots, and reducing reserves by 2 or 3. Most teams have at least 2 DL-eligible players at any point in the season but it's the teams that have 6+ core players on the DL that really get hit hard by having to release all of their speculative guys or else take a zero in a spot or two. Making "tough choices" is one thing, but when pure luck has this big of an impact on the standings, it unnecessarily makes the game worse. Again; inertial reasoning is almost always a bad thing. The only reason people want it done this way, is because it's always been done this way.

As for the DL slots being "exploited" by owners as a safety net to draft injury prone players higher than they otherwise would, I fail to see the problem with that. Everybody has an equal chance to take more risks on injury-prone players. There's no luck involved.

[Gb2715]

I'm 100% against DL spots. The Free Agents are already somewhat limited in a 15-team league, if you remove the top 30 players from the free agent pool, the options would be even more limited.

Easy solution for that: remove 2 reserve spots and create 2 (or more) DL spots. Then you still have the same, if not more, usable players in the free agent pool. Healthy teams get 5 reserves to work with, teams loaded with injuries get 7 (or more) to work with. This isn't complicated; it's how 99% of fantasy leagues outside of the NFBC are run. Being different isn't always a good thing! I'm in favour of removing luck whenever it's feasible to do so. And I'm generally not in favour of maintaining rules simply due to inertial reasoning. This seems very straightforward.

Gotta say, having Suarez, Lamb, Bogaerts, Gyorko, Sal Perez, and Daniel Murphy all on the DL in my Auction Championship team really degrades the experience, and it's purely due to bad luck other than Murphy, who was a calculated risk. This isn't even mentioning the 3 pitchers who have each gotten injured in the past week.

I'd be in favour of having 4 or 5 DL spots, and reducing reserves by 2 or 3. Most teams have at least 2 DL-eligible players at any point in the season but it's the teams that have 6+ core players on the DL that really get hit hard by having to release all of their speculative guys or else take a zero in a spot or two. Making "tough choices" is one thing, but when pure luck has this big of an impact on the standings, it unnecessarily makes the game worse. Again; inertial reasoning is almost always a bad thing. The only reason people want it done this way, is because it's always been done this way.

As for the DL slots being "exploited" by owners as a safety net to draft injury prone players higher than they otherwise would, I fail to see the problem with that. Everybody has an equal chance to take more risks on injury-prone players. There's no luck involved.

This is way beyond ridiculous. So if you have lots of Dl players I have to battle you for more of my faab money because you can have guys in a DL slot? Yeah that's not happening. You can drop any of those players if you want/need to. If you can stash those guys the pick up top guys on waivers the how is that fair?
DL slots are available at Yahoo

[Brian Jenner]

I'm 100% against DL spots. The Free Agents are already somewhat limited in a 15-team league, if you remove the top 30 players from the free agent pool, the options would be even more limited.

Easy solution for that: remove 2 reserve spots and create 2 (or more) DL spots. Then you still have the same, if not more, usable players in the free agent pool. Healthy teams get 5 reserves to work with, teams loaded with injuries get 7 (or more) to work with. This isn't complicated; it's how 99% of fantasy leagues outside of the NFBC are run. Being different isn't always a good thing! I'm in favour of removing luck whenever it's feasible to do so. And I'm generally not in favour of maintaining rules simply due to inertial reasoning. This seems very straightforward.

Gotta say, having Suarez, Lamb, Bogaerts, Gyorko, Sal Perez, and Daniel Murphy all on the DL in my Auction Championship team really degrades the experience, and it's purely due to bad luck other than Murphy, who was a calculated risk. This isn't even mentioning the 3 pitchers who have each gotten injured in the past week.

I'd be in favour of having 4 or 5 DL spots, and reducing reserves by 2 or 3. Most teams have at least 2 DL-eligible players at any point in the season but it's the teams that have 6+ core players on the DL that really get hit hard by having to release all of their speculative guys or else take a zero in a spot or two. Making "tough choices" is one thing, but when pure luck has this big of an impact on the standings, it unnecessarily makes the game worse. Again; inertial reasoning is almost always a bad thing. The only reason people want it done this way, is because it's always been done this way.

As for the DL slots being "exploited" by owners as a safety net to draft injury prone players higher than they otherwise would, I fail to see the problem with that. Everybody has an equal chance to take more risks on injury-prone players. There's no luck involved.

This is way beyond ridiculous. So if you have lots of Dl players I have to battle you for more of my faab money because you can have guys in a DL slot? Yeah that's not happening. You can drop any of those players if you want/need to. If you can stash those guys the pick up top guys on waivers the how is that fair?
DL slots are available at Yahoo

What do you mean by "I have to battle you for more of my faab money"?? You think there's an unfair advantage given to teams that have an above-average amount of injured players? No system is perfect but this is far more fair than me having to drop Jack Flaherty so I can pick up Ryan Rua to put in my corner infield spot for a couple weeks (or keep Flaherty and leave the slot empty). Teams that have 4, 5, or 6 guys on the DL have been dealt a huge disadvantage. Having the "advantage" of being able to add a replacement player via FAAB is hardly preferable to having your players stay off the DL in the first place.

[Philippe27]

Having DL spots or more reserve spots wouldn't make it easier to deal with injuries. It would just mean that everyone would stash players early in the year and then leave only scrubs on the Free Agents. At least now if you have a player who has a season ending injury in June, you can pick up a decent replacement at most positions. If you take out the top 30 free agents by adding 2 DL spots, any injury after the first month would be even harder to deal with.

You can argue for more DL spots or reserve spots in the 12 team league but in the 15 team league, it's perfect the way it is.

[Brian Jenner]

Having DL spots or more reserve spots wouldn't make it easier to deal with injuries.

This is demonstrably false.

It seems like everybody against this is a traditionalist who likes it this way because it's always been this way. There are easy ways to fix all of the concerns people have. Seems like the big one is that there won't be any good players left as free agents. If we remove some reserve spots to compensate for the addition of DL spots, that problem goes away. Remove 3 reserve spots, add 4 DL spots. Or find some other ratio that works. Almost every league outside of the NFBC has figured this out a long time ago.

It'd be interesting to do a poll among active team owners to see what they think. I feel most people are in favour of adding DL slots in some way or another, with a vocal minority of traditionalists hanging out in the forums that make it seem like it's closer to 50/50. Making this change would probably lead to a lot more people joining and/or remaining. I know I've stopped doing AL/NL only leagues on here for a few reasons, with the way DL is handled being one of them.

[DOUGHBOYS]

The talk of changing any rule in the NFBC is met with non-budgers who like things the way they are.
It's just the way of the NFBC world.
I would like to see DL spots in some form.
BUT, if simply asking NFBC owners, do you want dl spots or not, it will be met with a resounding no, simply because of traditionalists.
If anybody is really serious about changing NFBC benches, they would have to first, come up with a well-thought out plan.
Trying to sell a plan that works for one on another site, may not work for all here.
Any plan would have to appeal to the masses more than what is in place.
From experience, it is a very tough thing to do.

[Gb2715]

The talk of changing any rule in the NFBC is met with non-budgers who like things the way they are.
It's just the way of the NFBC world.
I would like to see DL spots in some form.
BUT, if simply asking NFBC owners, do you want dl spots or not, it will be met with a resounding no, simply because of traditionalists.
If anybody is really serious about changing NFBC benches, they would have to first, come up with a well-thought out plan.
Trying to sell a plan that works for one on another site, may not work for all here.
Any plan would have to appeal to the masses more than what is in place.
From experience, it is a very tough thing to do.

I would be for daily lineup changes and a Thursday night FAAB before adding dl spots and taking away reserves. Most DL stints now are the 10 day and are retroactive so pitchers may miss a start and hitters might miss 2-3 games for half a week. Everyone is acting like their team is full of 60 day dl guys. So we are going to create DL spots for someone to stash a guy for 3 days then re activate him? Not gunna work. Then jackal will be complaining that he can't drop and activate until Monday morning even though the guy came off the DL Friday at noon.

[Gb2715]

Problem with daily lineup changes and a midweek FAAB is there will be a lot less leagues in the NFBC. With all the time you need to dedicate during the week. And this can't and wouldn't be good for business. Sometimes being different is the right business model. Jackal was saying 4 DL spots in a 15 team league? Yeah that will never happen.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Greg has already stated that there will not be daily lineup seasonal leagues unless it has a groundswell of support.
It forces daily trips to the computer, with those not checking being penalized.
In other words. it won't happen.

[DOUGHBOYS]

I also cannot see an overwhelming response in favor of dl spots...

[Ando]

None....

Draft Daniel Murphy and then complain he's hurt and sucking up bench space. Funny shit.

Cut him, now you're down to 6 with some flexibility. He had microfracutre surgery. One hopes for mid-April and now it looks like mid-May. And then the inevitable setback will happen and it'll be the first of June. And then he'll only play 4-5 times a week because he's rusty til the All-Star Break.

Duh?

But yet some will complain about an experience that is less than ideal...while other folks will tell you to look into the mirror.

[kgrady]

I have been playing fantasy baseball in some form or another for 30 years. I’ve had my share of success and also had more dismal seasons than I care to remember. Throughout all those years, I had always refused to use injuries as an excuse. Injuries are unfortunate, but they’re part of the game. Then came 2017, which was a complete debacle. Injuries torpedoed my season, so much so that it sucked all of the enjoyment out of the game. Sure, we all want to win, but it should be fun nonetheless. Last year was not. It was a total buzz kill and frankly it took me until March to gain any real enthusiasm for the 2018 fantasy campaign.

Injuries are worse now than they have ever been and I think this is a concern for the NFBC. It’s easy to rationalize that we need to tough it out, but when and if the game ceases to be fun, that’s a serious concern for continued participation year after year. There is no easy answer though. I concur with Greg’s concern about adding reserve spots because it would further dilute the free agent pool. That said, if we do nothing you run the risk of people dropping out.

Let me make a suggestion, and forgive me if someone has already brought this up. I often haven’t the time to read the message boards. Anyway, how about allowing owners to use their FAAB budget to buy additional reserve spots? Say $200 per spot? The price has to be high enough to make people think twice about it. You could buy at any time during the year and use it any way you wish. Keeping DL/suspended players, prospects, closers-in/waiting. This would add strategy in that some people might buy 4 and go the whole season with $200 to spend on free agents while others may not buy any and have a full bankroll for FA’s. Not an ideal solution, but it may help alleviate some concerns about injuries without ruining the free agent pool.

[Philippe27]

I think we all agree that injuries suck and would prefer to have a league where everyone stays healthy. The one thing I like about baseball is that with 23 players starting for 27 weeks, even if your 1st round pick is out for 2-3 months, it doesn't hurt nearly as much as it would in football and there's a lot of ways to make it up.

I think the one idea that could solve in part this problem is to have an IR-Designated to Return roster spot (kind of like in the NFL). Once in the year, you can put an injured player in that spot and bring him back on your roster when he's healthy. The spot can be used just once in the year.

It's not a perfect solution but it would allow a team that drafted Madison Bumgarner this year to put him in that spot for the first 2-3 months. Yes you'd still lose his stats but at least you wouldn't lose the roster spot for 2-3 months so it would lower the impact. The other advantage of this is that instead of removing 15 players from the Free Agents pool like a DL spot would, it would only remove I'm guessing 5 players at a time since it's not a reusable spot.

The 10-15 day injuries suck but they're part of the strategy. Everyone will have them and it's why we have 7 reserve spots. The long term injuries are the ones that really hurt, yes they're part of the game but an IR-Designated to Return spot would help alleviate the impact a little.

[Roy's Outlaws]

I think we all agree that injuries suck and would prefer to have a league where everyone stays healthy. The one thing I like about baseball is that with 23 players starting for 27 weeks, even if your 1st round pick is out for 2-3 months, it doesn't hurt nearly as much as it would in football and there's a lot of ways to make it up.

I think the one idea that could solve in part this problem is to have an IR-Designated to Return roster spot (kind of like in the NFL). Once in the year, you can put an injured player in that spot and bring him back on your roster when he's healthy. The spot can be used just once in the year.

It's not a perfect solution but it would allow a team that drafted Madison Bumgarner this year to put him in that spot for the first 2-3 months. Yes you'd still lose his stats but at least you wouldn't lose the roster spot for 2-3 months so it would lower the impact. The other advantage of this is that instead of removing 15 players from the Free Agents pool like a DL spot would, it would only remove I'm guessing 5 players at a time since it's not a reusable spot.

The 10-15 day injuries suck but they're part of the strategy. Everyone will have them and it's why we have 7 reserve spots. The long term injuries are the ones that really hurt, yes they're part of the game but an IR-Designated to Return spot would help alleviate the impact a little.

This is the only solution that at least make some sense, and is FAIR to all teams in each league and keeps the integrity to the over-all contests. Injuries are suppose to hurt your teams, NOT help them! Having DL spots will help teams with injured players as they will now have control of more players on their rosters ,than teams with no injured players.
If the NFBC had let say 2 DL spots per team, then every owner would be an IDIOT not to keep those 2 spots full at all times. So 30 less players in the free agent pool. If you don't keep your Dl spots filled, then you are giving your opponents an advantage at having a more player on their rosters and under their control. Then what happens when a player come off the DL.WHen does the owner have to drop another player to open a NON-DL spot? What if he forgets?

7 Bench spot are more than enough,make the tough decisions if you have too many injured playes. It happens to all of us ,sooner or later. Stop being that guy that NOTHING is Ever your FAult. You want Good Luck go buy a Rabbits Foot.

[Yah Mule]

I think we all agree that injuries suck and would prefer to have a league where everyone stays healthy. The one thing I like about baseball is that with 23 players starting for 27 weeks, even if your 1st round pick is out for 2-3 months, it doesn't hurt nearly as much as it would in football and there's a lot of ways to make it up.

I think the one idea that could solve in part this problem is to have an IR-Designated to Return roster spot (kind of like in the NFL). Once in the year, you can put an injured player in that spot and bring him back on your roster when he's healthy. The spot can be used just once in the year.

It's not a perfect solution but it would allow a team that drafted Madison Bumgarner this year to put him in that spot for the first 2-3 months. Yes you'd still lose his stats but at least you wouldn't lose the roster spot for 2-3 months so it would lower the impact. The other advantage of this is that instead of removing 15 players from the Free Agents pool like a DL spot would, it would only remove I'm guessing 5 players at a time since it's not a reusable spot.

The 10-15 day injuries suck but they're part of the strategy. Everyone will have them and it's why we have 7 reserve spots. The long term injuries are the ones that really hurt, yes they're part of the game but an IR-Designated to Return spot would help alleviate the impact a little.

This is the only solution that at least make some sense, and is FAIR to all teams in each league and keeps the integrity to the over-all contests. Injuries are suppose to hurt your teams, NOT help them! Having DL spots will help teams with injured players as they will now have control of more players on their rosters ,than teams with no injured players.
If the NFBC had let say 2 DL spots per team, then every owner would be an IDIOT not to keep those 2 spots full at all times. So 30 less players in the free agent pool. If you don't keep your Dl spots filled, then you are giving your opponents an advantage at having a more player on their rosters and under their control. Then what happens when a player come off the DL.WHen does the owner have to drop another player to open a NON-DL spot? What if he forgets?

7 Bench spot are more than enough,make the tough decisions if you have too many injured playes. It happens to all of us ,sooner or later. Stop being that guy that NOTHING is Ever your FAult. You want Good Luck go buy a Rabbits Foot.

I could live with this, too. I think sparing someone the extra burden of losing a roster spot due to an uncuttable player taking a half-season obliterating injury or suspension is reasonable. I wouldn't fight for it, though.

[Brian Jenner]

That's a good solution. A one-time use DL spot. It's kind of hard to make DL spots useful without having 3+ of them (since most teams have a DL-eligible player or two at any given time and it's only the teams with 3+ that really are really at a disadvantage), but this does the trick in a different way. And there are enough people here dead-set against adding any kind of DL slots that a compromise is likely necessary since the optics of adding 3 DL slots won't fly.

Another possibility, is being able to place players on the DL once you have 4+ of them on your roster. So if you have 5 guys hit the DL, you can put one of them in a DL slot, and so on. There are a few ways to go about that, but it's difficult to implement, and even harder to get people to understand how to use it.