Poll: What positions to use for batters

[RocketsDWM]

Vote only once. Only league members shall vote.

Obviously, 1=1B 2=2B and so on.

[smoovethug]

I voted other. I hate to be difficult but all of these seem to have flaws IMO. I'm all for LF, CF, RF. I'd prefer IF over MI and CI but I've got no problem there either. Actually its fine because I like deeper rosters. Just seems that if you're going to have MI and CI then you'd need to add a OF to LF, CF, RF. My preferred layout would look like: C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, MI, CI, LF, CF, RF, OF, Util.

[Snakes Gould]

I voted other. I hate to be difficult but all of these seem to have flaws IMO. I'm all for LF, CF, RF. I'd prefer IF over MI and CI but I've got no problem there either. Actually its fine because I like deeper rosters. Just seems that if you're going to have MI and CI then you'd need to add a OF to LF, CF, RF. My preferred layout would look like: C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, MI, CI, LF, CF, RF, OF, Util.

if you're going to have CI and MI i think you have to have 2 more added OF spots. you add 2 non-real infield slot, you should have 2 non-real OF spots as well. i like the lf, cf, rf, but i voted other as well.

also, in no way do i want 2 catchers.

[bobbing_headz]

Voting other as well. Agree with Snakes that there needs to be more OF if there's CI/MI which I'm in favor of. Not a big fan of LF/CF/RF but here's my proposed system:

C,1B,2B,3B,SS,CI,MI,LF,CF,RF,OF,OF,Util

[smoovethug]

Yeah you guys are right there needs to be 2 OF's in that.

[RocketsDWM]

OK, we will have another vote on this.

[Grounded Polo]

I voted other. I hate to be difficult but all of these seem to have flaws IMO. I'm all for LF, CF, RF. I'd prefer IF over MI and CI but I've got no problem there either. Actually its fine because I like deeper rosters. Just seems that if you're going to have MI and CI then you'd need to add a OF to LF, CF, RF. My preferred layout would look like: C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, MI, CI, LF, CF, RF, OF, Util.

That option sounds fine.

[threelions]

I voted one,
simple and balanced

[fantasybeast27]

I voted other. I hate to be difficult but all of these seem to have flaws IMO. I'm all for LF, CF, RF. I'd prefer IF over MI and CI but I've got no problem there either. Actually its fine because I like deeper rosters. Just seems that if you're going to have MI and CI then you'd need to add a OF to LF, CF, RF. My preferred layout would look like: C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, MI, CI, LF, CF, RF, OF, Util.

That option sounds fine.

That is fine with me

[kaveman]

I voted other. I'd prefer basic positions plus IF,OF or CI,MI,OF,OF.