Explain The Appeal Of NL/AL Only Leagues (1 Viewer)

[Encyclopedia Brown]

I don't get playing in a league that includes only half of all major league rosters.

You can't say that it cuts down on research; in fact, I think it only increases research because you have to dig through depth charts to find someone to fill out your lineup.

I had Tex, and Rich Harden last season. If I had to lose those two in the middle of the season just because they switched leagues I would have friggin' stopped making moves and started concentrating on my football cheatsheets.

For those in such leagues, explain this, please.

 

[eagles2007]

the biggest reason is to prevent everyone from having an all-star team and to make sure each team more closely resembles a major league team in that you have a few scrubs.

you can build rules around midseason trades. some leagues allow you to keep the player for the rest of the year and accumulate his stats. some give you the player he was traded for. if you have neither of those, you probably have FAAB and if you managed your team right all year you could make a big play for the player who comes to the NL ala manny ramirez.

i won't play in a 10- or 12-team mixed league. takes the fun out of it.

 

[Michael Brown]

the biggest reason is to prevent everyone from having an all-star team and to make sure each team more closely resembles a major league team in that you have a few scrubs.

you can build rules around midseason trades. some leagues allow you to keep the player for the rest of the year and accumulate his stats. some give you the player he was traded for. if you have neither of those, you probably have FAAB and if you managed your team right all year you could make a big play for the player who comes to the NL ala manny ramirez.

i won't play in a 10- or 12-team mixed league. takes the fun out of it.

I have a hard time with these two statements. If that's the case for you, more power to ya. I know a bunch of people with the same mindset. I just don't think it makes a league any more fun to have John Buck in my starting lineup.

 

[Tom Servo]

I don't get playing in a league that only includes half of all major league rosters.

You can't say that it cuts down on research; in fact, I think it only increases research because you have to dig through depth charts to find someone to fill out your lineup.

I had Tex, and Rich Harden last season. If I had to lose those two in the middle of the season just because they switched leagues I would have friggin' stopped making moves and started concentrating on my football cheatsheets.

For those in such leagues, explain this, please.

This is PRECISELY why these leagues exists. To me, having a 10 team league with access to every MLB players proves NOTHING to me in terms of what you know about talent. I can get my 7 year old son to pick an All-Star team. You need to know who the utility INF is for the Rangers just in case he steps into an everyday role. You need to know where teams are going and how they think if you're going to build an effective team.

If you can replace one superstar with another, so what? You didn't prove anything to anybody.

 

[DaddyFatSacks]

The extra research and digging is what makes it fun. I've been in a 3 player keeper NL only league for the past 4 years and it has been a great experience. The league started back in '85 right after the Tigers won the world series, so at that time all the members being from MI didn't want to root against the Tigers so they went NL only and haven't looked back.

The feeling of buying a guy like Braun at the auction and then watching him get called up in May and explode is awesome. it does come with its downsides though, the same year I bought Braun as a prospect I picked up Josh Hamilton as a potential stud and had to watch him go the AL. I also lost Texthis year, I was really hoping that he would be a keeper for years to come.

If you haven't tried a league that only uses AL or NL I would suggest you give it a ride.

 

[Captain Hook]

I don't get playing in a league that only includes half of all major league rosters.You can't say that it cuts down on research; in fact, I think it only increases research because you have to dig through depth charts to find someone to fill out your lineup.I had Tex, and Rich Harden last season. If I had to lose those two in the middle of the season just because they switched leagues I would have friggin' stopped making moves and started concentrating on my football cheatsheets. For those in such leagues, explain this, please.

First of all your last point in not valid - most AL or NL only leagues let you keep the player and continue to accumulate his stats for the new team (yes there are some that don't but no many and some give you the choice of getting the player(s) they were traded for but again not many) - certainly under your control to make sure the league rules are what you wantSecond YES it does increase research and knowledge and that is what most players find more interesting and compelling about going deeper into the player pool and having to know more players.Also some people grew up with a home town team and thus are far more familiar with the league that team is in and while they have very good AL knowledge, don't care to learn all the players in the NL (obv vis versa)It is also analagous to why auction leagues and keeper leagues are more fun (challenging and stimulating) than redraft leagues.But to each his own............if you don't like them, don't play in them, but don't try and belittle those on the other side either.

 

[Michael Brown]

I don't get playing in a league that only includes half of all major league rosters.

You can't say that it cuts down on research; in fact, I think it only increases research because you have to dig through depth charts to find someone to fill out your lineup.

I had Tex, and Rich Harden last season. If I had to lose those two in the middle of the season just because they switched leagues I would have friggin' stopped making moves and started concentrating on my football cheatsheets.

For those in such leagues, explain this, please.

This is PRECISELY why these leagues exists. To me, having a 10 team league with access to every MLB players proves NOTHING to me in terms of what you know about talent. I can get my 7 year old son to pick an All-Star team. You need to know who the utility INF is for the Rangers just in case he steps into an everyday role. You need to know where teams are going and how they think if you're going to build an effective team.

If you can replace one superstar with another, so what? You didn't prove anything to anybody.

My main league is a 12 team league with 30-man rosters (we start 21 guys), so we're not plucking Kevin Youkilis off the waiver wire. I think it's a nice balance to go with a bench because then you don't have superstars sitting on waivers but at the same time you're not filling out your lineup with bums. Just my $.02.ETA: I know who the utility guys are and which bench players/minor leaguers would be considered valuable and viable if they ever got a chance for regular duty, and most of my league does too...if you play with knowledgeable people, none of us feels the need to prove anything to one another...we all know stuff, good for us. Doesn't mean we have to have those guys in our lineups to make it fun.

 

[Eephus]

NL/AL only leagues used to be almost a necessity back in the pre-innernet age of manual stat keeping. I still think they work better for auction leagues because a lower replacement level leads to more realistic value assessments. 12 team mixed auctions can have some pretty decent $1 players which provides too big of a safety net for owners who overspend early.

For draft leagues, I don't think it makes much difference although mixed leagues need to have longer benches to keep the waiver wire from being too rich.

 

[Bluesbomber]

I would think since the two leagues have different rules it would make sense to do a AL or NL only league since the DH affects pitching stats as well as hitting stats.

 

[Spartans Rule]

This is PRECISELY why these leagues exists. To me, having a 10 team league with access to every MLB players proves NOTHING to me in terms of what you know about talent. I can get my 7 year old son to pick an All-Star team.

Strangely enough, even though there's NOTHING to be proven about your knowledge of talent in a 10-team mixed league, people who know more about baseball still find a way to win. If your 7 year old son is in a 10-team mixed league with Bill James, they'll both have lots of good players, but Bill James will still have a much better team.I personally prefer deeper leagues, but there's still plenty of skill involved in picking among the best players.

 

[Encyclopedia Brown]

Michael Brown nails it.

Isn't this game supposed to be fun?

I don't see the fun in submitting a lineup with Paul Bako and Mark Grudzielanek.

 

[Eephus]

Michael Brown nails it.Isn't this game supposed to be fun?I don't see the fun in submitting a lineup with Paul Bako and Mark Grudzielanek.

Grudzielanek goes 3-4 with a R and a couple of RBI on occasion.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

I did a couple of NL-only leagues, but decided that the extra preparation learning all the bench and bullpen guys in the league wasn't fun nor worth the time.

My main league is a good compromise. We have 12 owners and use 18 MLB teams, some from the AL, some from the NL. It solves the "everyone has an All-Star team" problem without forcing everyone to spend time researching guys you would otherwise ignore.

 

[urbanhack]

Michael Brown nails it.Isn't this game supposed to be fun?I don't see the fun in submitting a lineup with Paul Bako and Mark Grudzielanek.

Grudzielanek goes 3-4 with a R and a couple of RBI on occasion.

Not since 2007.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

After some contemplation I think the biggest reason I don’t enjoy fantasy baseball compared to other sports is that I can’t root for any player playing the Tigers regardless of circumstance. I think I will actually seek out NL only leagues going forward for this reason

 

[Michael Brown]

After some contemplation I think the biggest reason I don’t enjoy fantasy baseball compared to other sports is that I can’t root for any player playing the Tigers regardless of circumstance. I think I will actually seek out NL only leagues going forward for this reason

Eh, you can have it both ways. Your guys don't play your favorite team that much, and it's easy enough for me to separate the two. A friend of mine quit fantasy baseball awhile back when he found himself rooting for Eric Milton against the Yankees during a game he went to, but he's since returned.I just root for the Yankees first, and my fantasy guys second. If nothing else, having your players do well against your team provides something of a silver lining for a real-life loss. No Yankee fan is happy losing 10-2 to the Red Sox, but if Ortiz drives in 3 and Lester strikes out 10, at least you benefit in some small way however incestuous and disgusting the feeling. ETA: Before anyone questions my allegiance, I'm obviously not HAPPY if/when this happens, just saying that if it's going to happen anyway I might as well get something out of it.

 

[the moops]

I would think since the two leagues have different rules it would make sense to do a AL or NL only league since the DH affects pitching stats as well as hitting stats.

Does this make no sense to everyone else as well?

 

[Eephus]

I would think since the two leagues have different rules it would make sense to do a AL or NL only league since the DH affects pitching stats as well as hitting stats.

Does this make no sense to everyone else as well?

If there were two identical SPs, one in the NL and one in the AL, you'd always draft the National Leaguer because they get to face the opposing pitcher 2-4 times per game.

 

[the moops]

I would think since the two leagues have different rules it would make sense to do a AL or NL only league since the DH affects pitching stats as well as hitting stats.

Does this make no sense to everyone else as well?

If there were two identical SPs, one in the NL and one in the AL, you'd always draft the National Leaguer because they get to face the opposing pitcher 2-4 times per game.

OK.Why does that necessitate AL or NL only leagues though?

 

[Pip's Invitation]

I would think since the two leagues have different rules it would make sense to do a AL or NL only league since the DH affects pitching stats as well as hitting stats.

Does this make no sense to everyone else as well?

If there were two identical SPs, one in the NL and one in the AL, you'd always draft the National Leaguer because they get to face the opposing pitcher 2-4 times per game.

OK.Why does that necessitate AL or NL only leagues though?

It doesn't, unless you're obsessed with having players that face the same conditions or something. Of course, the "purity" argument has been invalid ever since MLB introduced interleague play. IMO, an AL pitcher gets valued a little less than a comparable NL pitcher, but it's really not much different from a pitcher who makes half his starts in Coors suffering in value compared to a pitcher of equal talent who makes half his starts in Petco. It's just part of the game.

 

[dparker713]

I like deep leagues with shallow benches, makes the waiver wire difficult and trades all that more important. Plus, by playing in an NL only league I dont have to watch the farce that is DH baseball.