24 players @ $250This is all about quantity over quality, if the contest allowed 30 roster spots, I'd have 30.
Im pretty interested in seeing the hard numbers once the cuts start to happen. Based on the replies in this thread, there seem to be plenty of people on either side of this issue.
The question is, how much extra value are you getting for the extra dollars you're spending on the players in your 20-player roster? Take an example; let's say you use your extra 4 slots for two $1 players and two $2 players; that means the 20-person roster has $6 more to spend on studs. Let's throw that into one RB and one WR. $3 is the difference between Brandon Jacobs and Ronnie Brown, or between Hines Ward and Santana Moss. The 24-player roster gets Jacobs/E.James/T.Choice and Housh/J.Cribbs/D.Clowney. The question is whether E.James+T.Choice+J.Cribbs+D.Clowney will score more in your lineup than the difference between Jacobs/Ward and Brown/Moss.My view on it is, the difference between Jacobs/Ward and Brown/S.Moss is fairly small; in fact, I think Jacobs/Ward have a relatively high probability of outscoring Brown/S.Moss on their own. With the additional chances you get of the cheap players scoring a TD and saving your butt in a bye week, or pulling an Antonio Bryant and providing good production all year, I think the 24-player strategy works better.The other option is to pour all $6 into one player, and upgrade from Steve Smith to Larry Fitzgerald. Then you have Jacobs+S.Smith+E.James+T.Choice+J.Cribbs+D.Clowney against Jacobs+Fitzgerald. Again, to me the difference between Smith and Fitzgerald isn't large enough to be worth giving up those four scoring opportunities.