Why should a roster spot be locked in this situation?

[bigh0rt]

I agree with the consensus here that a roster spot should be locked in this situation.

However, I had another situation come up today with regards to locked roster spots that I'd be curious to hear thoughts on.

I checked my team around 6:45 to see if any of my players weren't starting in the 7 p.m. games, and saw that Ellsbury was not going to be in the lineup (game hadn't started yet). On my bench I had Melvin Mora, who was going to be playing (game hadn't started yet). Of course, Mora is not an OF... but in my IF spot I had the ever-versatile Chris Duncan, who had already played. I was hoping I could move Duncan from IF to OF (in no way gaining an advantage by knowledge of what happened in his game) and then slide Mora in at IF. Alas, no can do.

I'm not mad about this in the slightest, but it did get me thinking that it would be cool if we could move players who had already played to different positions in our lineups as long as we don't remove them. You really don't get any knowledge advantage here, it just gives you some added flexibility. Anyone agree? Disagree?

i don't really agree with you here. to me once a player's game has started he should be locked. where you have him set in your lineup up to that point is up to you.

on another note, ESPN still has the upper hand over Yahoo in allowing add/drop up until the first game of the current day. with Yahoo you still have to make those transactions before midnight. IMO Yahoo keeps falling behind more and more as ESPN adds better features and a better (and now more reliable) interface.

Unless I'm mistaken, this is an adjustable league setting.

[Fantasy Sports Genie]

I agree with the consensus here that a roster spot should be locked in this situation.

However, I had another situation come up today with regards to locked roster spots that I'd be curious to hear thoughts on.

I checked my team around 6:45 to see if any of my players weren't starting in the 7 p.m. games, and saw that Ellsbury was not going to be in the lineup (game hadn't started yet). On my bench I had Melvin Mora, who was going to be playing (game hadn't started yet). Of course, Mora is not an OF... but in my IF spot I had the ever-versatile Chris Duncan, who had already played. I was hoping I could move Duncan from IF to OF (in no way gaining an advantage by knowledge of what happened in his game) and then slide Mora in at IF. Alas, no can do.

I'm not mad about this in the slightest, but it did get me thinking that it would be cool if we could move players who had already played to different positions in our lineups as long as we don't remove them. You really don't get any knowledge advantage here, it just gives you some added flexibility. Anyone agree? Disagree?

i don't really agree with you here. to me once a player's game has started he should be locked. where you have him set in your lineup up to that point is up to you.

on another note, ESPN still has the upper hand over Yahoo in allowing add/drop up until the first game of the current day. with Yahoo you still have to make those transactions before midnight. IMO Yahoo keeps falling behind more and more as ESPN adds better features and a better (and now more reliable) interface.

Unless I'm mistaken, this is an adjustable league setting.

You are correct. It is a plus league setting, but in plus leagues you can indeed choose same day roster transactions. This is a mixed bag; the benefits are obvious, but often people who play this way find it confusing at first as well. For example, you want to drop a guy, but he's playing in a game. You can't. You need to wait until the following day.