The Great Roster Move Discussion

I've played around 100 Mystery Card teams, and among others things here are 2 things I have learned: no 2 of us manage exactly the same way, and you can never stop learning new ideas about how to construct a roster.

In recent weeks I've read comments on multiple other threads or league message boards about managers who make "too many" roster moves. All of these comments were by veteran managers whom I respect and enjoy competing against, and none of them were offensive or in any way "wrong". I was just surprised by them, because I honestly don't get how having another manager make too many roster moves can be a bad thing. In many cases, guys who jettison players left and right are giving up on them too early, or misreading the cards altogether. By doing so, they are helping the rest of us figure out what season guys are on, if we are doing our homework. That sure isn't a bad thing.

Anyone who has been in a league with me knows that I usually am one of the more "active" managers when it comes to roster moves, whether I am in 1st or last place. I like to tinker: sometimes it helps, sometimes it doesn't. What sometimes annoys me are managers who make no moves all season. Maybe part of that is jealousy: I could never be that patient. But I genuinely get frustrated when I see a team with a bad record and zero or almost no roster moves, who has players who could help me via trade or free agency pickup, but for all I know the manager created the team and then left it alone for 8 weeks without checking in. I routinely message other managers to inquire about trade ideas, but I consider it a waste if time to check in with an inactive manager.

Please let me emphasize again: I want to have a discussion, not a debate. I use words like "annoyed" fully aware that the other manager is t actually doing anything wrong, but that it's more about me not understanding the method. But seriously, what do the rest of you think? Would you rather be in a league with managers who mostly make a lot of moves, mostly no moves, or a mix? Is there such a thing as "too many" roster moves (I say yes) and what is too many? Chime in if you like.

I think I am a tweener manager. I certainly make a fair number of moves, I never make none but, haven't been in the upper echelon either. My teams that need that many moves, well I just throw in the towel and move on. I do not care if guys make alot of moves or none when I'm in a league. I am guessing that the quick cut managers either have a list of tells or they are gambling on the one year wonder cards. Or they just enjoy that aspect of the game. Myself once the draft, waivers and frenzy are over it's all downhill.

That said I see others points​. If they like a more realistic game limiting moves would be something in that direction. These could just be league options. There is an argument either way but, it does come down to personal preference.

I guess my preference is having other managers make moves (or no moves) that allow me to win the championship. Actually, two "seasons" ago, I made zero moves in the '60's, which shocked me. I'm sometimes too quick on the trigger. But in that league, I had the best W-L record about from day 1, won 101 games, had a +200 (exactly) run diff. and every guy that I could reasonably assume what their card was, had a good card. Naturally, I lost in the 1st round of the playoffs. In my latest season, which I won, I barely made the playoffs but 3 of my most key guys were dropped by other managers, one quite late in the season. Mostly, I don't care what the other managers do--it's their team/money--but I'm always alert to see if there's a clue in a dropped guy that might have been overlooked by his first manager.

The more I play the less I tend to make moves. I used to over think them, and I guess I still do which is why I some time stand pat. But if you going to error I say error on the side of more moves. You really don't have a lot to lose, it is fun to do and if you crap out you just move on. But then you can get into chasing cards and that is not good.

It might make for a better game if there was a minimum number of games played by the player's team (not the player) before you could drop the player. 10-game minimum, perhaps. It's somewhat disconcerting to see batters who get dropped after going 1 for 9 after three games, or pitchers who are dropped after only one or two shaky appearances. You can't learn too much about such a player. Can't say it's super-fun to take a chance on a "used car" with no "paperwork" provided by the owner. I'd rather acquire a player who's never been used than a used player with hardly any history.

I'm conservative about turning over players. I don't want to drop anyone unless I have good evidence he has a poor card. This is not to say I'm not looking to make a move--to the contrary. I spend a lot of time studying results and also roster moves by other managers. I'm just cautious about pulling the trigger.

However, I am not going to claim my way is best. In fact, the best manager I have played against (talking about you, Franky!), was quick to drop players.

Sometimes, though, a you just have bad luck with a draft. Too many players seem to be on bad years and your team is about to drop into oblivion. Then, I will get more active and take more chances.

The most recent Mystery Tournament Finals indicates that the most successful players use a lot of early season moves. Moodywoody, this year's champion (and a repeat champ at that) led with a massive number of early season moves. I didn't count the number of moves, but it was huge. Some of the cut players turned out to be on good seasons but with only a 5% penalty there isn't a lot to lose. I believe that Moodywoody even picked up some of the players that he cut early on. In general, there were a huge number of player moves by many of the Finals teams and by mid-season there were practically no players in the 80s that hadn't been tried. So, the empirical evidence suggests that early season moves (that is, low penalty moves) are generally helpful, although the moves didn't help my miserable finals team in which I cut a few players on good years.

In most cases, you have a 20% to 40% chance of owning the right season.

If early results make those odds even more unfavorable, I think it's best to make a move while there is still ample talent on the waiver wire.

When in doubt stay the course. If the player is slumping but is on a good card, keep him... If the player is killing it, but on his worst card, dumb him.

I always respond to trade offers, even the outrageous ones.