Or FA's or rookies from teams not in the league. Another reason a 20 team league would be better

Let's try to fill it with 24.  For the scenario coachgreat1 raised, you would need to trade for another catcher, or patch things together from rookies and players cut by other teams.  Lowering the number of keepers might be necessary, to make sure enough players remain available at all positions.

If you keep at 24 teams I don't think teams will have enough ABs or IP unless you load them with AAA help.

I'll take the Red Sox if we limit it to 20 teams. Otherwise, IP and IF in the early 80s won't work.

I agree. Keeping it at 20 teams might be best. I also like the idea of starting players with the teams that they played their first MLB game with.We could keep it in the same spirit of the rule you have for minimum games played. You get rewarded for doing your homework. If you look up the new rookies to WiS in a season and see that a player played their first MLB game with your team before their WiS season then you can alert the commish and then place that player on your team. Anyways I'll join up with the Cincinnati Reds if this gets underway.

I am against a random pitching help player as mentioned in the rules post. Also can we decline rookies or players that would be assigned to us? For instance with the Reds they have Bill Plummer who has two pretty bad seasons in 1977/1978. Do I have to have him on my roster? Also what is the procedure for players who do not have a WiS season in 1977? Are they the property of whoever they played for last, or who they play for next? The one example of this with the Reds that I've found is infielder Rick Auerbach. He played for the Reds in 1977, but didn't have enough ABs to have a WiS season. He returns to WiS in 1978. What about guys who miss the entirety of 1977, but are not rookies?

           See,s like we are sort of replaying the 1977 season but with certain tweaks. I will take Kansas City.

I'd be very much interested in this league if you would add 1 more concept to it, and that is when a player changed teams in real life they would also do that in this league too by making them a free agent. I'd be willing to help keep track of the players and when each one should become a free agent.

Posted by bheid408 on 8/23/2015 9:24:00 AM (view original):
I'd be very much interested in this league if you would add 1 more concept to it, and that is when a player changed teams in real life they would also do that in this league too by making them a free agent. I'd be willing to help keep track of the players and when each one should become a free agent.

That is a monumental change. LOL

Just want to say that either the "free agent" proposal, or the player goes with the first team he played for (not the WIS rookie season) would both be HUGE changes that might have impacted people's roster choices. (e.g. we're talking about the different of the Red Sox getting Fisk and Lynn for their careers or just a couple of seasons, and the difference between Ryne Sandberg going to the Phillies or the Cubs.) Seems late to introduce such big shifts!

Well the "Free Agent" idea would basically make trading useless so I don't see how it could work without completely getting rid of trades. The idea that I floated would only affect a few players and even then only for people that did their homework about their own players (keeping with the spirit of the rule requiring minimum games played or release.)

The more I think about it the idea of minimum games or release seems like it would be hard to police. In the example given if I don't play Soto in at least 5 games in 1977 he is available in the 1978 Draft, but only if someone else notices and then drafts him, even without him being listed as available. How would we check that? What if enough time has passed between the end of the season and the draft that we can't go back and check the stats of the players?

Posted by crazyamos on 8/23/2015 12:36:00 PM (view original):
Just want to say that either the "free agent" proposal, or the player goes with the first team he played for (not the WIS rookie season) would both be HUGE changes that might have impacted people's roster choices. (e.g. we're talking about the different of the Red Sox getting Fisk and Lynn for their careers or just a couple of seasons, and the difference between Ryne Sandberg going to the Phillies or the Cubs.) Seems late to introduce such big shifts!

Agreed

We need to just stay with the original rules, otherwise we're going to start losing owners before we even get started.

Truth! Original rules but 20 teams?

Yeah, I still think 20 teams would be better