Date   

Re: ASSL '81: Pre-Draft File

John Anderson
 

Bayou City cuts:

Mike Squires
Frank Pastore
Dick Tidrow
Dick Drago
Jeff Little
Dan Larson
Bob Lacey

On Monday, June 22, 2020, 03:54:08 PM CDT, Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...> wrote:



Here's the official pre-draft c-file. Please get your cuts to 30 or fewer by Friday. As soon as all cuts are in we can start trading, drafting et cetera.

Should be clean but double check for errors/dropped players/uncarded.


ASSL '81:Spokane f-file

mlassman2001
 

Here are the Spokane cuts.

John D'Acquisto
Rick Matula
Kevin Bell
Duffy Dyer
Bill Travers
Mike Willis
Pat Kelly
Joe Ferguson
Bobby Bonds

Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...>
To: ASSL@groups.io
Sent: Mon, Jun 22, 2020 3:54 pm
Subject: [Special] [ASSL] ASSL '81: Pre-Draft File


Here's the official pre-draft c-file. Please get your cuts to 30 or fewer by Friday. As soon as all cuts are in we can start trading, drafting et cetera.

Should be clean but double check for errors/dropped players/uncarded.


Mt. Lebanon's cuts

Steve Alvin
 

Here is the Terriers' 30 man roster.

Thanks,

Steve


Re: Seltzer 30 man roster

Umpy
 

File attached for Seltzer

Cuts:

Ned Yost
Onix Conception
Hosken Powell
Mike Vail
Jerry Martin 
Rob Wilfong
Gary Gray
Sid Monge
Bill Castro
ZZZPat Underwood

Keeping zzzBeckwith.  On attached file. 

On June 22, 2020 at 4:54 PM "Steven Galbraith via groups.io" <stevemgalbraith@...> wrote:


Here's the official pre-draft c-file. Please get your cuts to 30 or fewer by Friday. As soon as all cuts are in we can start trading, drafting et cetera.

Should be clean but double check for errors/dropped players/uncarded.


 


Re: ASSL '81: Pre-Draft File

Jeff Heisterkamp
 

Waterloo Roster after cutting...



From: "Steven Galbraith via groups.io" <stevemgalbraith@...>
To: "ASSL" <ASSL@groups.io>
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 3:54:06 PM
Subject: [Special] [ASSL] ASSL '81: Pre-Draft File


Here's the official pre-draft c-file. Please get your cuts to 30 or fewer by Friday. As soon as all cuts are in we can start trading, drafting et cetera.

Should be clean but double check for errors/dropped players/uncarded.


ASSL '81: Mudville Nine cuts to 30

Kevin McNally
 

Mudville Nine roster cuts to 30 attached.

 

Thanks,

    Kevin

 

 


ASSL '81: Summary of roster cuts

Scott Clark
 

Steven, will there be a summary of roster cuts once all teams are at 30?  If not, I'd be happy compile and distribute to everyone.  

Scott /// Melonville  


From: ASSL@groups.io <ASSL@groups.io> on behalf of Thomas Battiato via groups.io <Dodger300@...>
Sent: June 22, 2020 6:22 PM
To: ASSL@groups.io <ASSL@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ASSL] ASSL '81: Florida 30 Man Roster
 
1981 Florida 30 Man roster attached.


-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...>
To: ASSL@groups.io
Sent: Mon, Jun 22, 2020 4:54 pm
Subject: [Special] [ASSL] ASSL '81: Pre-Draft File


Here's the official pre-draft c-file. Please get your cuts to 30 or fewer by Friday. As soon as all cuts are in we can start trading, drafting et cetera.

Should be clean but double check for errors/dropped players/uncarded.


Re: Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice

Thomas Battiato
 

Okay, I guess I read it wrong. Sorry.


-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin McNally <kmcnally28@...>
To: ASSL@groups.io <ASSL@groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Jun 22, 2020 5:42 pm
Subject: Re: [ASSL] Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice

That’s what it says

Kevin
Sent from Outlook via iPhone

From: ASSL@groups.io <ASSL@groups.io> on behalf of Thomas Battiato via groups.io <Dodger300@...>
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 2:22:23 PM
To: ASSL@groups.io <ASSL@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ASSL] Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice
 
If we remain on the current 2-3-2 format as stated as stated below, shouldn't there be one rest day between games 2 and 3, and another between games 5 and 6? Rather than this:

"There will be one day of rest between games 2-3 & 5-6 in all rounds."




-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...>
To: ASSL@groups.io
Sent: Mon, Jun 22, 2020 3:40 pm
Subject: [ASSL] Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice

A new poll has been created:

Proposal #2 is a bit complicated and concerns the post-season structure or schedule.

If we go to a third wildcard team, then the post-season will go as follows. The wildcards will begin TWO days AFTER the end of the regular reason (or any tie-breaking games). Currently, it is one game. We will continue with the 2-3-2- format.

A key change is that there will be a one day of rest AFTER the end of the SCHEDULED game 7 and NOT the deciding game of a series.

There will be one day of rest between games 2-3 & 5-6 in all rounds.

Wildcard round:

Seeds 1 & 2 get a first round bye.

Seed #3 hosts #6 in a best of 7.  Starts 2 days after the end of the regular season.  2 days in case of any tiebreakers.

Seed #4 hosts #5 in a best of 7.  Starts 2 days after the end of the regular season.  2 days in case of any tiebreakers.

1 day of rest between Game 7 on schedule (even if none of the series go seven games) and Game 1 of Semifinals.

 

Semifinals:

Seed #1 hosts worst remaining seeded team

Seed #2 host the other wildcard round winner

 

1 day of rest between Game 7 on schedule (even if none of the series go seven games) and Game 1 of Finals.

 

Finals/World Series:

Team with best record hosts the other remaining team

1. Yes, go with this proposed scheduling of the post season
2. No, stick with the current structure and just add a third team
Do not reply to this message to vote in the poll. You can vote in polls only through the group's website.


Re: ASSL '81: Florida 30 Man Roster

Thomas Battiato
 

1981 Florida 30 Man roster attached.


-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...>
To: ASSL@groups.io
Sent: Mon, Jun 22, 2020 4:54 pm
Subject: [Special] [ASSL] ASSL '81: Pre-Draft File


Here's the official pre-draft c-file. Please get your cuts to 30 or fewer by Friday. As soon as all cuts are in we can start trading, drafting et cetera.

Should be clean but double check for errors/dropped players/uncarded.


Re: Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice

Kevin McNally
 

That’s what it says

Kevin
Sent from Outlook via iPhone


From: ASSL@groups.io <ASSL@groups.io> on behalf of Thomas Battiato via groups.io <Dodger300@...>
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 2:22:23 PM
To: ASSL@groups.io <ASSL@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ASSL] Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice
 
If we remain on the current 2-3-2 format as stated as stated below, shouldn't there be one rest day between games 2 and 3, and another between games 5 and 6? Rather than this:

"There will be one day of rest between games 2-3 & 5-6 in all rounds."




-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...>
To: ASSL@groups.io
Sent: Mon, Jun 22, 2020 3:40 pm
Subject: [ASSL] Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice

A new poll has been created:

Proposal #2 is a bit complicated and concerns the post-season structure or schedule.

If we go to a third wildcard team, then the post-season will go as follows. The wildcards will begin TWO days AFTER the end of the regular reason (or any tie-breaking games). Currently, it is one game. We will continue with the 2-3-2- format.

A key change is that there will be a one day of rest AFTER the end of the SCHEDULED game 7 and NOT the deciding game of a series.

There will be one day of rest between games 2-3 & 5-6 in all rounds.

Wildcard round:

Seeds 1 & 2 get a first round bye.

Seed #3 hosts #6 in a best of 7.  Starts 2 days after the end of the regular season.  2 days in case of any tiebreakers.

Seed #4 hosts #5 in a best of 7.  Starts 2 days after the end of the regular season.  2 days in case of any tiebreakers.

1 day of rest between Game 7 on schedule (even if none of the series go seven games) and Game 1 of Semifinals.

 

Semifinals:

Seed #1 hosts worst remaining seeded team

Seed #2 host the other wildcard round winner

 

1 day of rest between Game 7 on schedule (even if none of the series go seven games) and Game 1 of Finals.

 

Finals/World Series:

Team with best record hosts the other remaining team

1. Yes, go with this proposed scheduling of the post season
2. No, stick with the current structure and just add a third team
Do not reply to this message to vote in the poll. You can vote in polls only through the group's website.


Re: Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice

Thomas Battiato
 

If we remain on the current 2-3-2 format as stated as stated below, shouldn't there be one rest day between games 2 and 3, and another between games 5 and 6? Rather than this:

"There will be one day of rest between games 2-3 & 5-6 in all rounds."




-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...>
To: ASSL@groups.io
Sent: Mon, Jun 22, 2020 3:40 pm
Subject: [ASSL] Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice

A new poll has been created:

Proposal #2 is a bit complicated and concerns the post-season structure or schedule.

If we go to a third wildcard team, then the post-season will go as follows. The wildcards will begin TWO days AFTER the end of the regular reason (or any tie-breaking games). Currently, it is one game. We will continue with the 2-3-2- format.

A key change is that there will be a one day of rest AFTER the end of the SCHEDULED game 7 and NOT the deciding game of a series.

There will be one day of rest between games 2-3 & 5-6 in all rounds.

Wildcard round:

Seeds 1 & 2 get a first round bye.

Seed #3 hosts #6 in a best of 7.  Starts 2 days after the end of the regular season.  2 days in case of any tiebreakers.

Seed #4 hosts #5 in a best of 7.  Starts 2 days after the end of the regular season.  2 days in case of any tiebreakers.

1 day of rest between Game 7 on schedule (even if none of the series go seven games) and Game 1 of Semifinals.

 

Semifinals:

Seed #1 hosts worst remaining seeded team

Seed #2 host the other wildcard round winner

 

1 day of rest between Game 7 on schedule (even if none of the series go seven games) and Game 1 of Finals.

 

Finals/World Series:

Team with best record hosts the other remaining team

1. Yes, go with this proposed scheduling of the post season
2. No, stick with the current structure and just add a third team
Do not reply to this message to vote in the poll. You can vote in polls only through the group's website.


locked Re: Unbalanced Schedule: More Intra-Division Games #poll-notice

Thomas Battiato
 

18 teams don't fit well into four divisions (5-5-4-4?). 

We should expand to 20 teams or contract to 16 if we were going to do that, and the last expansion proposal was voted down.

Tom


-----Original Message-----
From: JOHN CAMPBELL via groups.io <icemn16@...>
To: ASSL@groups.io
Sent: Mon, Jun 22, 2020 5:06 pm
Subject: Re: [ASSL] Unbalanced Schedule: More Intra-Division Games #poll-notice

Steven,

Is it possible to reorganize the league into 4 divisions??

4 division winners and 2 wildcards?

Just an idea.  I'm not a fan of the 3 division set up we currently use.

Thanks John

On Monday, June 22, 2020, 02:45:20 PM CDT, Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...> wrote:


A new poll has been created:

Proposal #3 concerns the schedule. Currently, we play a balanced schedule.

1. Should ASSL teams play an unbalanced schedule, with more games played against opponents within their division than against opponents outside of their division?

1. Yes, play a unbalanced schedule with games to be determined later
2. No, stay with the current structure
Do not reply to this message to vote in the poll. You can vote in polls only through the group's website.


locked Re: Unbalanced Schedule: More Intra-Division Games #poll-notice

JOHN CAMPBELL
 

Steven,

Is it possible to reorganize the league into 4 divisions??

4 division winners and 2 wildcards?

Just an idea.  I'm not a fan of the 3 division set up we currently use.

Thanks John

On Monday, June 22, 2020, 02:45:20 PM CDT, Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...> wrote:


A new poll has been created:


Proposal #3 concerns the schedule. Currently, we play a balanced schedule.

1. Should ASSL teams play an unbalanced schedule, with more games played against opponents within their division than against opponents outside of their division?

1. Yes, play a unbalanced schedule with games to be determined later
2. No, stay with the current structure

Vote Now

Do not reply to this message to vote in the poll. You can vote in polls only through the group's website.


ASSL '81: Pre-Draft File

Steven Galbraith
 


Here's the official pre-draft c-file. Please get your cuts to 30 or fewer by Friday. As soon as all cuts are in we can start trading, drafting et cetera.

Should be clean but double check for errors/dropped players/uncarded.


locked Unbalanced Schedule: More Intra-Division Games #poll-notice

Steven Galbraith
 


Proposal #3 concerns the schedule. Currently, we play a balanced schedule.

1. Should ASSL teams play an unbalanced schedule, with more games played against opponents within their division than against opponents outside of their division?

Results

See Who Responded


Post Season Playoff Setup/Schedule #poll-notice

Steven Galbraith
 

Proposal #2 is a bit complicated and concerns the post-season structure or schedule.

If we go to a third wildcard team, then the post-season will go as follows. The wildcards will begin TWO days AFTER the end of the regular reason (or any tie-breaking games). Currently, it is one game. We will continue with the 2-3-2- format.

A key change is that there will be a one day of rest AFTER the end of the SCHEDULED game 7 and NOT the deciding game of a series.

There will be one day of rest between games 2-3 & 5-6 in all rounds.

Wildcard round:

Seeds 1 & 2 get a first round bye.

Seed #3 hosts #6 in a best of 7.  Starts 2 days after the end of the regular season.  2 days in case of any tiebreakers.

Seed #4 hosts #5 in a best of 7.  Starts 2 days after the end of the regular season.  2 days in case of any tiebreakers.

1 day of rest between Game 7 on schedule (even if none of the series go seven games) and Game 1 of Semifinals.

 

Semifinals:

Seed #1 hosts worst remaining seeded team

Seed #2 host the other wildcard round winner

 

1 day of rest between Game 7 on schedule (even if none of the series go seven games) and Game 1 of Finals.

 

Finals/World Series:

Team with best record hosts the other remaining team

Results

See Who Responded


Post Season Playoff Teams: Adding a Third Wilcard #poll-notice

Steven Galbraith
 


Currently, ASSL has five playoff or post season teams. This consists of each division winner plus the next two teams with the best overall records.

This proposal will add a third wildcard team to the post season consisting of the team with the third best overall record that did not win a division.

Note: All three wildcard teams may come from the same division.


The six teams and their seeding will consist of:

#1 Seed                Division Winner with best record

#2 Seed                Division Winner with second best record

#3 Seed                Division Winner with third best record

#4 Seed                Best record of non-division winning teams (Wildcard team #1)

#5 Seed                Second best record of non-division winning teams (Wildcard team #2)

#6 Seed                Third best record of non-division winning teams (Wildcard team #3)

In case of a tie for a division winner OR the last wild card team, a one game playoff will be scheduled to take place IMMEDIATELY after the end of the regular season. All other ties for seeds will be decided by head-to-head records.

Note: Before voting you may wish to consider the proposed post season playoff structure which will follow in a separate poll.

Results

See Who Responded


ASSL '81: Starting to Get Started

Steven Galbraith
 


Pleas send in your rule change submissions - in your wording - sent to me. I'll post them and we can vote. I'd like to get any major changes voted on BEFORE drafting in case how you draft is effected by the changes.

Also, I'll send out the latest c-file for 1981 and we can start getting our cuts in.


Re: Draft thoughts/roster cutbacks

Scott Clark
 

Where are we at...starting to draft soon?  

Melonville Mirage ASSL


From: ASSL@groups.io <ASSL@groups.io> on behalf of Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith@...>
Sent: June 1, 2020 12:08 PM
To: ASSL@groups.io <ASSL@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ASSL] Draft thoughts/roster cutbacks
 
I think the 30 limit for ASSL is large enough for teams to both have coverage and to keep/stash a prospect. And the innoc players provide coverage. The best of both worlds.

The 24 limit in J-ROB is more difficult to handle. And, as you said, that 930/100 limits makes it difficult to balance things out. So 24 with a "distorted" 930 causes headaches.

In J-Rob, I had to cut a couple of good players that would have helped me this year. It's brutal competing against Seneca. I can't keep up with them. In ASSL there would have been no problem keeping them.

Really, the key is the number.

On Monday, June 1, 2020, 12:03:39 PM EDT, Steve Alvin <salvin123@...> wrote:


Chris,

In my experience, I disagree.  I've had bad teams in ASSL and other leagues were there are cut backs and I've never had problems keeping prospects and having enough coverage.  The difference with J-Rob when compared to other leagues like ASSL is the cockimany rules regarding 930 players.  In that league my bad team has had to constantly worry about coverage.

Steve
"I have snatched my share of joy from the grudging hand of fate as I have
jogged along, but never has life held for me anything quite so entrancing as
baseball."--Clarence Darrow


On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:06 AM Chris Strovel (Harpers Ferry Federal Armory) <strovel@...> wrote:
Except that the teams that are currently weak (in the main) have more coverage holes. The stronger teams with no coverage issues can afford to draft a little bit earlier that prospect that will take a few years to mature. I think roster cuts enable strong teams to hang onto the long-term prospects better.


==
On May 29, 2020 at 1:28 PM "Thomas Battiato via groups.io" <Dodger300=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

I completely agree with Steve on this. The smaller the roster, the more parity there is. The logic is simple to follow:

If we kept zero players, every team would start the season on an equal basis, only separated by draft order.

If we kept only one player, the best  team would not be that far apart from the worst, and everyone would still have an good chance to draft a winning team.

If teams only kept their five best players, there may begin a bit of separation, but still not much.

At ten players each, the depth of a couple teams would start to rise a bit above the rest of the field.

If we kept 20 players each, there are now significant differences in the quality of the players kept. The players kept in slots 11-20 would vary significantly in quality from the best teams to the worst.

At 30 players each, there are major differences, in present value and often in prospects for the future, which cannot be made up short of several years of fortuitous drafting and trading.

At 40 players, it would be far more difficult for the weaker teams to catch up, as there is plenty of room for the better teams to hoard every player of any value rather than release them to the draft. The weaker teams can use this pool of players to find the coverage needed at various positions.

Thus, I would be opposed to keeping all the players on a roster every year as it serves to reward the stronger teams.

Thank you for your consideration.

Tom




-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: assl@groups.io; assl@groups.io
Sent: Fri, May 29, 2020 12:58 pm
Subject: Re: [ASSL] Draft thoughts/roster cutbacks

 
C: I'm not sure where you get the less than 70 new players? Baseball Reference has 146 players making their debuts in 1981.

As to off season cuts: My view is that is helps parity (or can) by preventing a good team(s) from stashing too many players. If a weaker team is cutting a good/better future player to keep a coverage player then that's, well, dumb <g>. With innoc players and pitchers you can always grab a body late to give you coverage.

I really can't understand why a team lacks coverage. Unless the owner is just not caring after the first 2-3 rounds. With innoc and the bonus everyone should be able to get coverage. It may be lousy coverage but it's a body.

I think 30 gives a lot of wiggle room to both keep top players AND be able to stash a future player.

On Friday, May 29, 2020, 9:45:32 AM EDT, Chris Strovel (Harpers Ferry Federal Armory) <strovel@...> wrote:


Looking at the 1981 crop of rookies, there are less than 70 new players, so we will be drafting recycled players pretty early in this one, maybe as early as the mid-2nd round. Being in the league only five seasons, I may have missed the disucssion, but has there every been a thought to eliminating the off-season roster cutbacks? We went through this discussion in J-Rob over the years, and my belief is that off-season roster cuts hurt parity. I know that's not universally agreed, but I think those cuts make it harder for the weaker teams to build for the future because they are forced to retain coverage in the short term, rather than build depth. Just two cents.....

==
 

 


Re: Draft thoughts/roster cutbacks

Steven Galbraith
 

I think the 30 limit for ASSL is large enough for teams to both have coverage and to keep/stash a prospect. And the innoc players provide coverage. The best of both worlds.

The 24 limit in J-ROB is more difficult to handle. And, as you said, that 930/100 limits makes it difficult to balance things out. So 24 with a "distorted" 930 causes headaches.

In J-Rob, I had to cut a couple of good players that would have helped me this year. It's brutal competing against Seneca. I can't keep up with them. In ASSL there would have been no problem keeping them.

Really, the key is the number.

On Monday, June 1, 2020, 12:03:39 PM EDT, Steve Alvin <salvin123@...> wrote:


Chris,

In my experience, I disagree.  I've had bad teams in ASSL and other leagues were there are cut backs and I've never had problems keeping prospects and having enough coverage.  The difference with J-Rob when compared to other leagues like ASSL is the cockimany rules regarding 930 players.  In that league my bad team has had to constantly worry about coverage.

Steve
"I have snatched my share of joy from the grudging hand of fate as I have
jogged along, but never has life held for me anything quite so entrancing as
baseball."--Clarence Darrow


On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:06 AM Chris Strovel (Harpers Ferry Federal Armory) <strovel@...> wrote:
Except that the teams that are currently weak (in the main) have more coverage holes. The stronger teams with no coverage issues can afford to draft a little bit earlier that prospect that will take a few years to mature. I think roster cuts enable strong teams to hang onto the long-term prospects better.


==
On May 29, 2020 at 1:28 PM "Thomas Battiato via groups.io" <Dodger300=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

I completely agree with Steve on this. The smaller the roster, the more parity there is. The logic is simple to follow:

If we kept zero players, every team would start the season on an equal basis, only separated by draft order.

If we kept only one player, the best  team would not be that far apart from the worst, and everyone would still have an good chance to draft a winning team.

If teams only kept their five best players, there may begin a bit of separation, but still not much.

At ten players each, the depth of a couple teams would start to rise a bit above the rest of the field.

If we kept 20 players each, there are now significant differences in the quality of the players kept. The players kept in slots 11-20 would vary significantly in quality from the best teams to the worst.

At 30 players each, there are major differences, in present value and often in prospects for the future, which cannot be made up short of several years of fortuitous drafting and trading.

At 40 players, it would be far more difficult for the weaker teams to catch up, as there is plenty of room for the better teams to hoard every player of any value rather than release them to the draft. The weaker teams can use this pool of players to find the coverage needed at various positions.

Thus, I would be opposed to keeping all the players on a roster every year as it serves to reward the stronger teams.

Thank you for your consideration.

Tom




-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Galbraith via groups.io <stevemgalbraith=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: assl@groups.io; assl@groups.io
Sent: Fri, May 29, 2020 12:58 pm
Subject: Re: [ASSL] Draft thoughts/roster cutbacks

 
C: I'm not sure where you get the less than 70 new players? Baseball Reference has 146 players making their debuts in 1981.

As to off season cuts: My view is that is helps parity (or can) by preventing a good team(s) from stashing too many players. If a weaker team is cutting a good/better future player to keep a coverage player then that's, well, dumb <g>. With innoc players and pitchers you can always grab a body late to give you coverage.

I really can't understand why a team lacks coverage. Unless the owner is just not caring after the first 2-3 rounds. With innoc and the bonus everyone should be able to get coverage. It may be lousy coverage but it's a body.

I think 30 gives a lot of wiggle room to both keep top players AND be able to stash a future player.

On Friday, May 29, 2020, 9:45:32 AM EDT, Chris Strovel (Harpers Ferry Federal Armory) <strovel@...> wrote:


Looking at the 1981 crop of rookies, there are less than 70 new players, so we will be drafting recycled players pretty early in this one, maybe as early as the mid-2nd round. Being in the league only five seasons, I may have missed the disucssion, but has there every been a thought to eliminating the off-season roster cutbacks? We went through this discussion in J-Rob over the years, and my belief is that off-season roster cuts hurt parity. I know that's not universally agreed, but I think those cuts make it harder for the weaker teams to build for the future because they are forced to retain coverage in the short term, rather than build depth. Just two cents.....

==