Recently I have seen some posts that express a concern that teams are benching thier star players.

I have also seen posts just recently that deal with platooning, and how a team full of severe lefty/righty matchups at every position can be effective but unrealistic.

It occurs to me that in PB we have a MAXIMUM usage for all players, but we don't have a MINIMUM usage. A minimum usage level is realistic because players (especially the stars) get unhappy if they don't play enough over a long period of time. A minimum usage level that was tied to actual MLB playing levels would address the two concerns I mentioned above. You would not be able to take an everyday player and turn him into a platoon player because he would soon become unhappy.

There are many ways to impliment a minimum usage. My suggestion is this. Once a player falls below his minimum usage he would become "unhappy". This unhappiness will have no effect unless he finishes the season in this unhappy or under used state. If that happens he will become a "disgruntled" player for the next season. Disgruntled players would play at diminished levels for a full season unless they are traded or waived. This would discourage people from sitting star players in an effort to gain better draft picks.

I think this would add an interesting element to the management of a team. It could concievably promote more trading and movement of players as well (if managers can't keep thier players happy).

I would also love to see an experimental league where some of the more radical ideas could be floated and tested. It may well exist already, but we on the outside don't get a chance to see it or participate.