One IL Spot Isn't Enough

Let me preface this by saying that which should not need to be said: There is no single right way to play fantasy baseball.

It's only natural, being the sort of person who is invested enough in the game to spend a chunk of his time writing about it, that I would develop strong opinions on how to run a league. I express several of them with full candor, but I also acknowledge that these are personal preferences and nothing more. If you prefer shallow leagues, or weekly moves as opposed to daily, or even having multiple catchers for some reason, who am I to sit in judgment? It's a fully customizable game, and you should do whatever keeps you grinnin'.

Having said that, if you are someone who plays, of your own free will, in a league with only one slot in which to place a currently injured player, I have one more thing to add:  What in the absolute hell is wrong with you?

Salt in the Wound

Forgive my brusque tone above, but it's difficult to understand why anyone would subject themselves to this level of torture. Fantasy baseball is enough of a random number generator as it is. We don't need to punish an injury-plagued owner any more than the injuries themselves already have. It's bad enough to go from a reigning MVP to the MVP of your league's waiver wire without forcing the owner to also choke on a dead roster spot or, worse, outright cut the presently hobbled star.

Now, there are mitigating circumstances. If your league features a deep bench - six or more reserve slots qualifies as deep, in my view - and no more than 12 teams, then one can make a reasonable argument for having just only one IL slot. The deeper the league or rosters, however, the less persuasive this argument becomes.

Those additional bench spots will themselves create the deep roster condition in larger leagues, rendering the waiver wire a barren wasteland and reinforcing the point that one IL spot is a pittance. If you have a deep bench with the understanding that part of most owners' benches will be earmarked for injured players, why not simply formalize the designation?

Like anyone else who plays this or any other game, I am wrong sometimes. Some years, you can replace that "sometimes" to "often." But I would rather lose because I made bad decisions fully of my own accord than having my hand forced by arbitrary strictures. And while a win is a win is a win, beating your rivals at their best is more satisfying. Nobody, or at least nobody worth knowing, wants to win on a technicality.

Perhaps the randomness is what you enjoy, and in that case, then in the words of Jules Winfield: My friend, this is just where you and I differ. While it's true that heightening the impact of injury adds a slice of realism to fantasy, it also is less fun. I err on the side of more freedom, not less; it's what America is all about, in theory if not practice.

We all live with plenty of restrictions in our lives. The idea of introducing more via a beloved pastime does not carry much appeal. Rules are absolutely necessary; they provide structure, direction, and purpose to their enterprise. But rules can also be capricious, and they are not above reproach in that instance.

To that end, I would love to hear some of the most ridiculous rules you've ever encountered in your fantasy baseball travails:

The Friday Meta is Kyle Bishop's attempt to go beyond the fantasy box score or simple strategic pointers and get at the philosophical and/or behavioral side of the game. It is hopefully not as absurd, pretentious, or absurdly pretentious as that sounds.

More Fantasy Baseball Analysis