"CATCHER - The request of INN from Mike works for me. Playing one knowingly should be penalized."


- I don't think having one catcher active should be penalized...especially if that catcher has plenty of PA's and was never injured.

I routinely carry only one catcher because the backup is a waste of a roster spot. If my starting catcher is full time, has a great bat, and was never injured, there is really no reason to carry a backup IMO.

Long term injuries will never happen to this type of catcher, and on the off chance that they get a day-to-day injury and go down in the middle of the game, having a non-catcher in there for a few innings isn't going to ruin the integrity of the whole season.

Example: Several years ago, I used Mike Sweeney as my full time catcher (for 3 straight years, when he was actually qualified as a catcher and had time behing the plate). I rarely, if ever, had a backup catcher active while the 25 man active roster was in force. Sweeney played every game, had an awesome bat from both sides, and never had an injury. If there was a rule that forced me to carry a backup catcher, I would have been upset as it would have basically given me a 24 man active roster since the backup would never have been used. Instead, I would use the spot on a 7th RP, or extra bench player.

If we are going to start forcing owners to have backup catchers, where does it end? Is a 5 man rotation going to become manditory too because of the chance of a manager leaving his 1st SP in the game too long and he'd have to use a RP as the starter in game 5?

Rather than add roster rules, fix the problem with the programming and make non-catchers horrible at defense!

Jon