Master Index of Archived Threads


Expanded Rosters

Does The Expanded Roster Make the Game...

...worse	3 votes
...better	5 votes
...the same	2 votes

Elster88 Sep 09 2008 08:15 PM

I think it's ridiculous that we have 18 pitchers in the bullpen and however many guys on the bench. It cheapens the game. Completely takes the strategy out of when to pinch hit. But I love that it's resting MY guys.

metirish Sep 09 2008 08:17 PM

I like that I am not watching guys come form the pen trying to get guys out and they have nothing , this way they get a rest and if we are fortunate some unexpected guys emerge.

metsmarathon Sep 09 2008 08:19 PM

i'd rather see it at the beginning of the season as opposed to the end of the season

themetfairy Sep 09 2008 08:20 PM

I like seeing The Youth of America at the end of the season.

AG/DC Sep 09 2008 08:21 PM

I like it. Rob Neyer makes a fine argument that, if the game is played one way for five months, it shouldn't be played another way the sixth month. I hear that, but I still like it. No team has a particular advantage except the one that prepares better, which is how it should be. I think it still leaves a lot of strategy, just not as much attrition-driven strategy. I would love to have such a roster. I'd add a couple of graduated college springers as designated pinch-runners, five catchers, punchless defensive specialists, etc.

Elster88 Sep 09 2008 08:22 PM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Sep 09 2008 08:27 PM

]I like seeing the youth of America I do too, but regarding strategy (or other facets of the game itself) do you think it takes away from the game? I'm interested in your opinion on that, specifically, too.

Elster88 Sep 09 2008 08:25 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Sep 09 2008 08:31 PM

AG/DC wrote: I like it. Rob Neyer makes a fine argument that, if the game is played one way for five months, it shouldn't be played another way the sixth month. I hear that, but I still like it. No team has a particular advantage except the one that prepares better, which is how it should be. I think it still leaves a lot of strategy, just not as much attrition-driven strategy. I would love to have such a roster. I'd add a couple of graduated college springers as designated pinch-runners, five catchers, punchless defensive specialists, etc. Yabbut, this is a different set of rules then you've played with all year. During the year questions like "left-handed specialist on the roster or no" actually matter. I guess a better way to state my opinion is that I want the rules to be the same throughout the season. That's why I dislike that a team with two nasty starters but three shitty ones in the backend can perform better in the postseason then they did in the regular season. It's not as accurate a reflection on the team as it was during the 162 games. But that's life I guess. Regarding preparation: It makes preparation a heckuva lot easier because now everyone can have everything on the roster. Should I have a LOOGY? Sure, how about two! Edit: Shit. I wrote my entire post without really reading the Rob Neyer part of yours. I'm an idiot.

AG/DC Sep 09 2008 08:30 PM

I fully understand that argument. But I'm not ready to buy it right now. You may get "everything," but most of everything is going to be sub-big league level. It can (almost) guarantee you won't have to make a decision that will leave you with an outfielder on the mound or a pinch-hitting pitcher, but it doesn't mean you'll have a big-league ready pitcher or batter.

metsguyinmichigan Sep 09 2008 08:34 PM

I see the argument, but it's better to have different rules for one month than a different rule for an entire league -- the DH.