ATG 999 Million Dollar Cap "Unwritten" Rules

Funny that a so called Liberal Libertarian, using the alias, The Last Druid, would try to shame me for going to prison for marijuana possession. Everything about that guy screams hypocritical coward.

My approach, with all leagues, is that unless the commish publishes specific rules when soliciting people to sign up, anything that the user interface allows is fair game.

Having said that, $999M cap leagues allow all kinds of strategies that some people consider unsportsmanlike and others consider it pulling the available levers in the system. Both are right, just coming from different perspectives.

Radagast, my advice in this scenario is to chalk it up as an opportunity to learn what can and does happen at that cap level. It's enjoyable for some and not for others.

If there wasn't a post from Druid during the organization of the league or in the league notes, any strategy should be considered fair game. I know that doesn't align with your views in this case. Just my opinion, I enjoy competing against you, and consider you a quality manager and valued member of the community.

Druid, same applies to you, as a great competitor and contributor to the group. Sorry to see all this baggage get aired out like this.

I posted a reply and feel bad that nobody is angry with me.

Don't fret uncle rowser. Maybe many of them have you blocked as a "foe"

I think that means they can't see your posts

I posted a reply and feel bad that nobody is angry with me.

This is the stupidest post I have ever seen. I hate when people do this.

(Feel better?)

I posted a reply and feel bad that nobody is angry with me.

I got so mad I started writing a post full of expletives. Then I remembered that sort of thing could get me banned. So I hit delete and just ate some ice cream. Soon as they answer my summons I will send some Daleks after you.

Seriously, I think we have pretty much beat this topic to death. No need to exterminate.

I used to do the weekly Friday unlimited draft a couple years ago and my take on the unwritten rules are that those rules are within what you as a manager feels what they need to do to feel good about your team. Many managers feel uncomfortable switching cards back and forth every night. Some do it all the time, nobody cares. At the unlimited cap level, your backup is probably very very good. In many cases I feel bummed because a guy like Medwick can't make my regular lineup. I don't mind injuries because I have Medwick or someone similar coming off the bench.

I like to just stick to the team I drafted and let my subs come in if they need too. Switching a Mays card every night because of the pitcher that day is just silly. With the relievers late in games, Mays will see both leftys and rightys, so it seems to me to be foolish to keep switching cards in search of that perfect match up...but do it if that is what you need to do. If a team needs to keep switching cards each night, that team is probably not going anywhere anyway.

Duh... Stupidest isn't a word.

And no, Petro, driud, who or whatever he she is, pales in comparison to He Who Shall Not Be Named.

I cant play anything higher than 120 MIL in ATG. Every team needs some kinda weakness. I mean, if not, than its the great managers who have nailed down multiple team strategies, against the others who might as well just take there money and waste it on scratch off tickets.

That, is just how I feel towards ATG and higher caps. I'm an ok manager at 120, but I get better and better the lower the salary cap gets. I am sure, there our countless managers who are totally opposite of me.

Getting back to the original question. What's wrong with dropping a player you own for a different card of the same player? Don't see why that would pose a problem.

Just to address this. And not to advocate for or against anything.

I think those who object would argue that if Brett gets injured Brett cannot switch to his backup body and keep going. They think of Brett as representing one person. There was a big debate many years back on the boards about whether you should be able to drop a card and immediately pick up another year of that same player. At one time in fact if you dropped Brett you had to pick up someone else. And then drop that person to pick up another version of Brett. People complained that sometimes during frenzy periods quick sharp people would snag the player before that second transaction could be made. A small minority felt it should stay that way. Majority talked Bernie in to changing it.

I suppose I can see their point if you are going for ultra realism.