A couple of observations about your thoughts:

Roto Games usually involve monetary prizes as reward for your efforts and many Roto games have a fee for player transactions. This is why they cap leagues at 10-12, or AL/NL leagues; they need everyone playing to have some studs so they feel like they have a chance to win the money at the end of the season. I have always thought of Roto as small wager gambling, requiring a fairly topical understanding of baseball in general to be successful---thus the mass appeal.

Sim games, especially our RT leagues, require a lot more passion for analysis and shrewd decision making, coupled with some luck---(If you held on to Joe Nathan for (2) years while he re-habed you would be pretty happy right now, though I don’t know anyone who did and I have looked).

RT leagues can be frustrating, if your guys get hurt, retire (I had Albert Belle), or under perform---(mirroring real baseball). There is some concern about unmanaged teams diluting the talent pool. I feel this is being addressed by opening up trades with these teams. The commish has a vested interest in keeping these teams attractive to perspective new owners, in fact I am sure that the standards for an equitable trade are going to be stronger than a usual trade between two owners. Really what he has done is demonstrated a willingness to take on the GM role for these teams thus insuring the continued liveliness of the game by opening up the full pool of players to trade activity.

A strong RT league is similar to a roto league in that the scubs are generally drafted only out of dire necessity, and yes, RT Owners do stockpile talent, though this is mitigated somewhat by having to cut to 27. One way to make RT drafts more robust would be to increase the number of cuts, say down to 22-24 after the rookie draft.

Another idea would be to cap PB value. Though I am not sure how well this would work. I suspect it would force some hard choices between Rookies with little playing time (small PB Value) and the bullpen as most RT owners obviously hold everyday position players and anyone who can start first. Unfortunately, it would likely have to fluctuate from year to year, thus requiring some algorithmic sorcery to create an equitable threshold.

One other idea is to institute some sort of salary cap structure/luxury tax. Those that stray above the limit could forfeit in the form of less Rookie/FA Picks or even monthly FA Picks.

A salary cap structure/luxury tax could also lessen the shark/minnow trades I have seen over the years, as owners would have to be aware of how an unbalanced trade would affect their salary structure. That said this idea would present some programming and logistical challenges as well.

Another thought would be to eliminate the random nature of the annual FA Draft. Have it run in inverse order of Won-Loss with consideration to overall PB Value/Usage as a guard against tanking games.

In the end, playing RT involves hard decisions about talent, its potential for brittleness, some luck, and patience---the same challenges all MLB owners, GM’s and manager’s face in building a winning franchise. I would consider (if possible) inverting the Annual FA Draft to correspond with W-L/PB Value and/or some sort of Salary Cap/Luxury/PB Value Tax as a way to add talent to all draft pools.

If you want to see a thin FA Draft where savvy owners have left some slim pickings, check out 98RT-3---but we still have 23 managed teams---its just more painful here.


Greg Holloway
PB 98RT3 SF Solons
PB 2000RT2 Clifton Skeeters