Anonymous
My feedback
4 results found
-
6th rankedAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
3rd ranked
An error occurred while saving the comment -
5th rankedAnonymous
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
This is just common sense.
-
9th rankedAnonymous
supported this idea
·
Mave, that is not true at all. First, if a GM stocks up on a bunch of RBs,it means he is weak in another area. Second, if I was the GM in your last scenario, there would be no "difficult choice" between my 5th RB spot or the future injury replacement. If one of my Rbs goes down, I'll replace him from that 5th spot. If another position goes down, I drop my worst player to pick up a replacement. Third, hand-cuff players rarely pan out. Most times the starter plays the whole year and the GM with the handcuff loses a roster spot for the whole year for no reason. That was their risk to take. Lastly, you could always just limit the total number of roster spots. In my league we have QB, 3 WRs, 2 RBs, TE, FLEX, K, DEF, 5 IDP and only 6 roster spots. This forces us to keep only those players we really want or need, ESP during the byes.