TImothy Warburg wrote:I don't have any team credits right now, but my next team will be a $60M. I'm in my first $120M league right now and didn't realize it was a slo-pitch softball league. I shudder to think what $200M must be like.
I think $200 million is generally only used in keeper leagues, where the supply and demand for players are managed by prospect drafts, limited free agent drafts, and rosters rules that usually permit 20 players to be protected and carried over from year to year. In effect, at $200 million, the $ are not really relevant.
$100 million cap teams are fun as well (must be a 12 team league, not 24, due to the available talent pool). In a $100 M cap league, it is a more moderate effect - it's like you're managing one of the elite MLB teams. $120 and $140 million leagues should be the same general idea, but yes, the talent pools will be like you have super-elite teams. The higher the cap, the less likely it is that players (either batters or pitchers) will achieve their real life stats, due to the high level of competition with other elite players. This might be especially true for pitchers, who are facing elite hitters in each at bat - hence your slow pitch analogy. But many players enjoy this style of league. It might be like getting the standard 5 team starter game in the old days with the game in the box (show of hands for those who remember that?!) with the top 5 teams in the league for that year. It's fun playing with elite talent and teams, but there's got to be a winner and a loser in each game, so the performance tends to suffer compared to their real life stats.
But the leagues that seem to best approximate the overall level of play are 24 team, $60 M cap leagues (or maybe $70 M as I said in a previous post), since this tends to most closely mimic the player roster choices available to most real MLB teams.
Thu May 02, 2013 8:43 am