Bench Size for 12 teamer - What is ideal? (1 Viewer)

[Angry Beavers]

Pretty simple question. I feel badly clogging up the Shark Pool with this but I am wondering if I am mistaken in my opinion. I commish a league that is 12 teams, start qb, 2rb, 3wr, te, k, and def. The current bench is 7. A couple of owners want to reduce the bench to 5. I think this makes the bench too small and does not reward savy drafting enough. What says the Shark Pool? TIA

Edited for spelling

 

[greggorymac]

Pretty simple question. I feel badly clogging up the Shark Pool with this but I am wondering if I am mistaken in my opinion. I commish a league that is 12 teams, start qb, 2rb, 3wr, te, k, and def. The current bench is 7. A couple of owners want to reduce the bench to 5. I think this makes the bench too small and does not reward savy drafting enough. What says the Shark Pool? TIAEdited for spelling

By savy drafting do you mean snatching up all the handcuff RBs and sitting on them?I think it's the opposite, with a smaller bench you have to be more savy on how you manage your team. If lets say you didn't forsee that you have 3 players on the same bye week, if when it comes to that bye do you drop that handcuff RB you've been sitting on all season or do you let go of that WR4? It will also make your FA pool alot more interesting as there will actually be more options. The less bench spots, the more FA activity (which means more $ in the FA pot and spoils for the winner).

 

[Angry Beavers]

by savy drafting I mean being able to roster a sleeper before he breaks out as opposed to hoping you are top of the waiver wire when it happens

 

[Z-Dog]

It depends on what you want to reward. If you want to reward owners for being great drafters and identifying sleepers in preseason, go with a big bench. Big benches also encourage more trading b/c there's nothing left on the WW. If you want to reward owners for being good on the WW, institute a blind bid system and shorten the bench. Neither is ideal, they just call for different strategies.

 

[greggorymac]

by savy drafting I mean being able to roster a sleeper before he breaks out as opposed to hoping you are top of the waiver wire when it happens

Which you will still be able to with a reduced bench, but you will have to manage how many sleepers you have more carefully around your players bye weeks. I say try it for a year and if it doesn't work go back to 7. I think at the end of this season you will like how the reduced bench size facilitates more FA activity and $ to the FA pool.

 

[Angry Beavers]

It depends on what you want to reward. If you want to reward owners for being great drafters and identifying sleepers in preseason, go with a big bench. Big benches also encourage more trading b/c there's nothing left on the WW. If you want to reward owners for being good on the WW, institute a blind bid system and shorten the bench. Neither is ideal, they just call for different strategies.

 

[David Yudkin]

I am in 12-team leagues with total rosters of anywhere from 14 to 22 man rosters. I like 18 the best, as you can stash some guys away, take some flyers, use a QBBC, etc. and not feel slighted. Too few roster spots make waiver wire claims a pain in the butt because you need someboday almost every week, while too many spots means there's no one notable worth claiming.

 

[The Mechanic]

We used to have a 22 man roster (12 team league) but found that there was neary nothing left in free agency. We lowered it to 19 man roster 2 years ago and with a $3 charge for free agents we find this works best and the extra is for refreshments during our SB Party.

 

[Cool in the pocket]

In addition to Yudkin and Z-Dog's reasoning, this year the big bench has merit due to the bye weeks. With 6 teams off on a couple of weeks, a short bench could make things pretty complicated. Some will say this is part of the draft and/or strategy and I agree to a point, but 6 teams is alot of players to account for and a bigger bench would leave no excuses.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I am 12-team leagues with total rosters of anywhere from 14 to 22 man rosters. I like 18 the best, as you can stash some guys away, take some flyers, use a QBBC, etc. and not feel slighted. Too few grost spots make waiver wire claims a pain in the butt because you need someboday almost every week, while too many spots means there's no one notable worth claiming.

My league is 16 and I would really like it to be 18 which I feel is the perfect number.

 

[s_ezy]

I like a bigger bench myself, it also for you to find the sleepers now, rather than someone picking them up on the WW after everyone sees a good game, to me a bigger bench rewards better preparation

 

[GregR_2]

Huh. Frankly I heard the bench was 7 and thought this thread was going to be about how THAT is too small.

Cutting it to 5? Frankly, I wouldn't play in such a league. I don't agree with the assessments about how small benches increase strategy. I think they reward luck much more than skill. Luck that your player isn't injured, or that if he's injured he's out for the season so you know you can cut him. Luck that you're at the top of the waiver order.

The amount of injuries that happen, you can easily have such a tiny bench taken up by guys who are temporarily out but will return in a few games and are legitimate starters. You shouldn't have to cut players like that just to field a starting lineup.

 

[Angry Beavers]

Thanks for the input - this is great - keep it coming!

 

[ahill84006]

We had pretty much the same problem in our league. Last year we were a 10 team league that drafted 20 spots total. This year we added 2 teams, and went to 16 spots. Some owners didn't like that so, we came up with a solution.

We will draft 20 spots, BUT the Monday before the first regular season game, all owners must be down to 16 spots. Kinda like the real NFL, all teams must be down to a certain number of players by the regular season.

This way you can draft players you might want to take a chance on, but when the season rolls around, you still have a decent free agent pool, and not as many choices on your bench.

Just an idea to think about.......................

 

[Angry Beavers]

We had pretty much the same problem in our league. Last year we were a 10 team league that drafted 20 spots total. This year we added 2 teams, and went to 16 spots. Some owners didn't like that so, we came up with a solution.We will draft 20 spots, BUT the Monday before the first regular season game, all owners must be down to 16 spots. Kinda like the real NFL, all teams must be down to a certain number of players by the regular season.This way you can draft players you might want to take a chance on, but when the season rolls around, you still have a decent free agent pool, and not as many choices on your bench.Just an idea to think about.......................

thanks!

 

[glock]

12 team, 15 position roster, start QB, 2RB, 2WR, TE, K, D- sooo, a 7 position bench here. We also have only 2 F/A moves per owner for the season to go along with injury moves for players listed as "out."

 

[glock]

Huh. Frankly I heard the bench was 7 and thought this thread was going to be about how THAT is too small.

Cutting it to 5? Frankly, I wouldn't play in such a league. I don't agree with the assessments about how small benches increase strategy. I think they reward luck much more than skill. Luck that your player isn't injured, or that if he's injured he's out for the season so you know you can cut him. Luck that you're at the top of the waiver order.

The amount of injuries that happen, you can easily have such a tiny bench taken up by guys who are temporarily out but will return in a few games and are legitimate starters. You shouldn't have to cut players like that just to field a starting lineup.

Our injury moves entail picking up a player from the F/A pool for the player listed as "out"...when that player returns from "out" status the owner may cut either him or the player picked up.