roche wrote: As an aside, I personally think reserve lists are to fantasy baseball as the designated hitter is to real baseball, but that is a story for another day.
Regarding reserve lists, I shudder when I think back to the bad old days of roto when you couldn't reserve a player except if he's officially on the DL. This led to many shenanigans like trading for injured players so that you can claim the newly-minted closer.
I actually miss the "bad old days"!
There was added importance (positive and negative) placed on risk taking at the auction. The restrictive roster movement very much changed how the game was played. If you bought a bad player, he was gonna hurt you until you got an opportunity to replace him.
We mitigated the "trading of injured players" shenanigans by not allowing DL spots to be traded. Each team had to send an active player along with the DL player. Since our FAAB and waiver claim ability was much more limited than most leagues of today, teams were hesitant to spend their own FAAB to consumate a trade.
I do not like reserve lists and liberal FAAB ($1000 budget with $1 minimum bid). It adds to the luck portion of the game (which is already substantial). Teams can stream pitchers. Take a flier on a starter and not pay a penalty for his acquisition beyond the one or two bad starts you eat before deciding to drop him for another flier. Many leagues of today have turned into crap shoots. Just keep grabbing players throughout the season until a gem is stumbled upon. I think it devalues draft day.
There is not right or wrong league type. Head-to-head, points league, AL only, NL only, Mixed, draft and hold (no transactions), no-trade leagues, NFBC, sim leagues, etc. BUT:
I preferred the Chuck Woolery leagues...."Once you buy a prize, he's yours to keep."
It's also why I lament the slow decline of deep AL and NL only leagues.
EDIT: By the time I could get my rant out, Lord Zola had already said much of what my sentiments are. I have to type faster.