Roster Size and Roster Position Limits (1 Viewer)

[Weekend Warrior]

I run a 12 team league where we draft a 16 player roster with no IR. Out starting lineup is 1 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1 DEF and 1 K. Typically, teams only draft 1 Def and 1 K.

I have some teams that want to expand the rosters to 18-20 players. I am against this as it will dry up the waiver wire. Historically, there are no a lot of trades either in this league for some reason. I personally do not want to expand the rosters at all.

We inevitably will vote on it tomorrow night at our draft. If we do vote this 18-20 player roster into effect, would you recommend position minimums and

maximums to avoid hoarding players at certain positions?

Any help would be much appreciated!

 

[gandalas]

I would think with only 18-20 players on a team, hoarding will not be an issue.

Honestly, even that many is kinda small. That may be the reason there are not many trades - if you can pick up a decent starter on the wire, then what is the point in giving up a good player on your team?

My main league is a 12-team league with 50-player rosters (IDP, so say about 30 players on offense or so). We have a healthy trading amount, because if you are short at a position, then there is not a top-20 player on the wire to grab.

 

[LittlePhatty]

20 would mean really deep benches, yes.

But I hate position maximums. I would never do that, no matter what.

I say hoard away. It will keep everyone awake at the end of the draft.

And everyone gets to do it equally.

 

[jon_mx]

I run a 12 team league where we draft a 16 player roster with no IR. Out starting lineup is 1 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1 DEF and 1 K. Typically, teams only draft 1 Def and 1 K. I have some teams that want to expand the rosters to 18-20 players. I am against this as it will dry up the waiver wire. Historically, there are no a lot of trades either in this league for some reason. I personally do not want to expand the rosters at all. We inevitably will vote on it tomorrow night at our draft. If we do vote this 18-20 player roster into effect, would you recommend position minimums and maximums to avoid hoarding players at certain positions? Any help would be much appreciated!

What we do is require each team to carry 2QBs, 4RBs, 4WRs, 2TEs, 2Ks, and 2Defs at all times. Then allow them to add those two players to two different positions. 18-20 players only contributes to hoarding. Why do you want productive players to be sitting 3 deep on someones bench, while some teams are struggling to put starters out there? It is no fun if everyone can't field a decent starting lineup.

 

[jon_mx]

20 would mean really deep benches, yes.But I hate position maximums. I would never do that, no matter what.I say hoard away. It will keep everyone awake at the end of the draft.And everyone gets to do it equally.

You must hate the NFL rules too. How many NFL teams get to carry 6 HalfBacks and 4 QBs?

 

[LittlePhatty]

Why do you want productive players to be sitting 3 deep on someones bench, while some teams are struggling to put starters out there? It is no fun if everyone can't field a decent starting lineup.

People think this makes the game more "fair". Not true. It just increases the luck factor. You might as well spin a big wheel to see who wins your league if you've taken all the skill out of it.Fair means the rules apply equally to every owner.Every owner has a deep bench.It is then up to each owner to fill it up with valuable players, or potentially valuable players.If an owner sucks at this game, it is unfair to the well-prepared, more skillful owners to force them to drop good players and give them to the owners who couldn't pick a decent team to begin with.

 

[LittlePhatty]

You must hate the NFL rules too. How many NFL teams get to carry 6 HalfBacks and 4 QBs?

Fantasy Football is an entirely different game. Your comparison means nothing.

 

[jon_mx]

You must hate the NFL rules too. How many NFL teams get to carry 6 HalfBacks and 4 QBs?

Fantasy Football is an entirely different game. Your comparison means nothing.

Fantasy Football tries to mimic the dilemmas of real owners. Having to make tough decisions on who to keep and who to cut. Hoarding players takes no skills. Managing a limited roster does.

 

[jon_mx]

Especially at the draft..

The deeper the rosters the better it is for the stronger owners. (Sharks)

The smaller the rosters the better it is for the weaker owners. (Guppies)

Just because someone sees a thread on some internet forum on some guy and tucks him away on his roster does not make him a "stronger" owner. Any 'guppie' can hoard players. You don't have to know a damn thing to stick players on your roster. Now if an owner takes that chance of sticking a flyer on his roster at the expense of cutting decent player, that takes a shark.

 

[LittlePhatty]

Having to make tough decisions on who to keep and who to cut. Hoarding players takes no skills. Managing a limited roster does.

Wrong.You can debate that it makes it more fun for you, or it is better for your league. That's opinion.But you can't say it increases the amount of skill needed.Smaller rosters reduce the number of decisions an owner needs to make.Larger rosters increase "who to start" decisions and "who to take a risk on" situations, and they offer more reward for owners who do more thorough research.

 

[WisWolvrns]

at the end of the day, each league is different. there is no cookie cutter fantasy football league.

albeit, position limits does add to the luck factor and limits owners from doing what they want. even in the example, nothing stops an NFL team from holding 6 FBs. they just don't do it because it doesn't make sense to get the right starters on the field and depth. same thing here. teams that horde at one position would limit their depth at others. leave it to each owner to choose to do that. Have a cap on roster (18-20), but no cap on positions or transactions.

 

[da_budman]

Our league has an 18 player roster with strict drafting requirements (3 qb's,4 rb's, 5wr's. 2 each of te.k.and D) and a starting lineup of 1qb, 2 rb, 3 wr 1 each of te,k,and defense.

AFTER the draft we then allow teams to be up to 2 deviations from the drafted roster. So if someone wants to hoardrunning backs thatsis fin,but they can only have 6. if they want to have extra wr's again only 2 over the drafted number.

If a team HAS hoarded its max of 5 rb's the only move they have at that time is to drop a rb for another rb, or a rb for another position come waiver wire time. They couldn't, for example dropaqb for a wr (or another rb).

It might sound complicated but once you get the hang of it, it allowsfora decent amount of flexibility while preventing 8 rb guy from wiping out the waiver wire. As to the why draft a certain number in the first place? Well people are just confortable with it and I havent been able to persuade them to do away with it.

 

[bigums]

20 would mean really deep benches, yes.But I hate position maximums. I would never do that, no matter what.I say hoard away. It will keep everyone awake at the end of the draft.And everyone gets to do it equally.

You must hate the NFL rules too. How many NFL teams get to carry 6 HalfBacks and 4 QBs?

Any that want to.