Gang Green wrote:stogusmaximus wrote:Matthias wrote:dude, you're so angry.
I am not angry, honestly.
I have just not heard a good reason why somebody with high transaction numbers is a bad thing, and/or a poor manager.
IMO, you should not have an unlimited amount of opportunities to "get it right" with players. If you draft well, you shouldn't have to do too many moves. If you draft poorly and are allowed unlimited transactions, you can take a flyer on every player who seems to catch fire and can therefore have just as competitive team as someone who drafted well. I spend alot of time and research for my draft. I expect to be rewarded for it, not to have it pissed on by some goofball who can take a shot at every player who gets on a good streak. Lastly, everytime somebody suggests limits, you immediately talk as if they said having zero transactions. I'm all for making transactions and bettering your team, but there has to be some rules involved to stop the poor managers from consistently churning the waiver wire to equal the production of your well drafted team. Just my 2 cents.
I don't really understand how a guy who just churns his roster for six months can equal the production of your well drafted team. There is a reason those guys are FA or on the wire, it's because they're not that good. Now if you can find a combination of six OF for one month at a time that equal a Vlad, you've done one helluva job running a team. As long as it's done in 162 games, more power to you. I fail to see how a guy that utilizes the hot bat isn't worthy of beating someone who drafts well.
I know in my main money league we have 162 GP limits and a 1250 IP limit. We also have 26 man rosters. I've grabbed guys like Shelton and Peralta even though I have good players at 1B and SS. They may not even play, but at least they're not on someone else's team and helping him beat me.
I don't see any problem at all with a lot of transactions as long as you have limits on GP and Innings.