Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

malthaussen

(17,788 posts)
3. I agree. :)
Mon Sep 30, 2024, 11:16 AM
Sep 30

In my league, there are the Brooklyn Dodgers and the Los Angeles Angels. The latter get the guys who played most of their time for LA. In either league. That disadvantages Brooklyn vis-a-vis most of the league, because the rosters are "Franchise All-Stars," and Brooklyn's franchise is losing 60 years worth of ballplayers. (New York in the same situation -- I have the Giants and the San Francisco Seals, and no DiMaggios on the latter). OTOH, the Angels and Seals lose anybody who played before c 1958.

Accordingly, I let some teams draw from the pool of Negro League stars or other franchise greats whose team did not make it into my 24-team league. And although KC is still called the Royals, most of their lineup is Monarchs.

It was one way to let both Steve Garvey and Gil Hodges play 1b, but this year Guerrero has out-hit Garvey by a bunch.

-- Mal

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Baseball»My computer baseball leag...»Reply #3