60's player pool...........insufficient?

Is it just me, or is the player replacement pool in the 60's game pretty sparse? It seems like once the season starts, there are no adequate replacement players left besides Joe Adcock and Leon Wagner...........and they aint that great.

The player pool is virtually identical to the 80s game but the players are priced higher to there is more to choose from than if you were playing the 80s game.

I'm in a 90M 60s league and 1½ hours after waivers ran Jimmy Wynn is still a free agent for example. That is after 12 teams put 10M more in salary on their teams than a normal 80M league.

But Wynn is just one player, and he has been taken in 2 of the three seasons I've played.

Could you name some other replacement players who are usually available who are solid replacements?

In the 90's, Mitchell, Justice, Kruk, and Lankford and other solid replacements are usually available after play starts.
Who are the solid replacements usually available in the 60's season?

Please tell me some and show me i'm wrong.

Also, how is the player pool "virtually identical" when it has different players?........just curious.

It is virtually identical in the size of the player pool. I think there is only 1 or 2 players difference in available players but many more higher salary players available due to the higher average cost of players in general. Due to higher priced players each manager will be forced to select more lower priced players to stay under the cap which leaves more higher priced players as replacements. But hey, if you prefer to play some other mystery card game that is great too.

In a 80M league that is still in the preseason the following very nice replacement options on the FA pool include:

Sievers, Siebern, Bando, Gentile, Allison, Perez, Dietz, Altman and others. I like all of those guys as well as some lower priced guys. I can't tell you if this is typical or not since the 60s is brand new and I've only been in a few leagues so far.

I've been in 3 leagues, and Bando, Gentile, and Allison weren't available in any of them after the start of play. I get it that the player pool size is the same as the 80's, but the 80's league also has a larger pool of solid replacement players with 3 or more solid seasons on the card.

I'm not trying to slag the 60's game as a game per se: there is a particular challenge to running a mystery card team with a lesser (in talent) talent pool. However, the replacement pool does seem lower in available talent (not players) than the other mystery card leagues.

Wasn't offense down during much of the 1960s, when compared to the 1980s and 1990s? There were also less teams so it stands to reason there would be less players. There are not many great middle infielders with great range or base stealers either but I think the average player became more athletic in the decades following the 1960s.

Wasn't offense down during much of the 1960s, when compared to the 1980s and 1990s? There were also less teams so it stands to reason there would be less players. There are not many great middle infielders with great range or base stealers either but I think the average player became more athletic in the decades following the 1960s.

I think this is true. Pitching was dominant in the 60s and as a result, MLB lowered the pitching mound from 15 down to 10 inches starting with the 1969 season. I find it interesting, because you have to manage a team with a weakness or two and try to compensate in other ways for the weaknesses.

you don't have to spend all your money on pitching to win with pitching!