How deep is too deep?

[HYLRedSox]

I think most of the true fantasy baseball fans (found here on this site, of course) would agree that the deeper the league, the better. By deeper, of course I mean a league requiring you to delve further into the actual baseball universe. The more teams, the more roster spots, the deeper the league becomes. It requires more knowledge than the average fan would have, and I have come to find the deeper the better. I hate seeing 8 stacked teams duke it out for the fantasy newbie crown.
Which I suppose brings me to the actual point of my post. I've joined a league with some of my good buddies. I was in a league with them last year. It is an AL-only 6X6 roto, probably my personal favorite league settings.
But it appears to me that the rosters are a bit TOO deep. 12 teams, and 30 roster spots per team. There is literally nothing on waivers. Don't get me wrong, I love the grind-it out style of roto that really separates the men from the boys, but our top free agent is Carlos Pena.
So my question is: too deep? Has this crossed the line to a bit ridiculous? Where would you draw the line? Any strategies on how to keep the league as competitive as possible?

Thanks for any input.

[itodd]

i played a 20-team league once, that was actually pretty fun when you are giddy about picking up guys ranked in the 100's.

i couldnt imagine anything past 24teams, i think that'd be my limit.

[John Bonzo]

I think that it it too deep when it is deeper than real Major League Baseball.

[whoseyourdaddy12]

too deep is anything larger then 16 team leagues that have more then 16 starting slots

[fezzik]

I've been in a 20 team league with 4 OF spots...that was tough...I actually won the league, but OF were tough to come by. It was really fun though. I think there were 26 roster spots, so that means 520 players are drafted...you really need to know your stuff, but that's why it was so fun.

We had 18 starting spots and 8 bench...

[teddy ballgame]

I wouldn't say deeper is better necessarily. I enjoy my 6 team league more than my 12 man one because I go to school with the people in my 6 team one. Some look down upon leagues that shallow but I really don't care what those people think.

For me, too deep is when I don't know who people on the WW are.

[imblotto]

That sounds perverted.

[j24jags]

I'm fine with anything from 10-16
I've been in a couple of 20 team leagues but those are not as much fun and I find that first/second round picks can single-handedly make or break your team. If you take a bust early in a 20 teamer good bye...

[mak1277]

I'm in a 9-team NL-only league with 22 man rosters and I love it. It's deep enough that you really need to know who the D-Backs 4th starter is, but it's not so deep that there is nothing on the wire.

The key to me is balance the # of teams with roster size. I also have a 12-team league with 30-man rosters, which is fun too.

I think 16-18 teams mixed, 9 or 10 teams "only" leagues are where I would have the most fun.

Too deep is a league where you are starting multiple players that are platooned or not regulars in real life.

[Art Vandelay]

I like deep leagues. One of my leagues is a 12-team NL-only that has two catchers, MI, CI, and five OF slots.