Re: Expansion - Round 2
Reply #15 –
I'm not really up for heavy debates these days. And really there are completely valid points on both sides but since there is a good debate going I'll throw some of my reasoning for being pro expansion in to the mix. Just don't expect me to respond much beyond this.
I think the same arguments for or against were made when we moved from 16 to 20 and I think we all now feel pretty positive on how that went. So I don't quite follow the logic that 16 to 20 is good but 20 to 24 is so bad. Where did we all the sudden draw that line? That's rhetorical.
I wanted to also add that griping (zero offense intended) about the costs of free agents is as American as apple pie. I've never been in a league where that didn't happen. I can roll with a few more frustrations and I will add, in our case, it's probably led to more active trading which I think is very interesting and exciting and adds a lot to our league.
I read Dan's post and had a completely different reaction to his thoughts. I think the interplay between the different owners is one of if not best things about our league and keeps me coming back. I look at 3 new owners as a very positive thing that creates a richer and more dynamic experience at the ownership level. Yes, the 3 waiting in the wings, could replace someone who decides to leave, but I would rather see them join us and add even more to what we already have. Adding new differences, new ways of looking at things and new and greater competition excites me and that is probably the biggest reason I support the idea of expansion.
It is true that these changes make our teams weaker, but it also begins to place different values on a wider set of players. Freddy Galvis pops into my head. Generally he is a very good defender and his bat is ok with pretty good pop for a middle infielder. In previous years, he would be a backup and maybe not even play but now he might be considered a viable starter on a potentially good team. Don't quote me on that this year. In years past, when he was on my team before expansion, he was always a player I thought could and should have more importance but frankly he just didnt. That player in todays game would have much more value. I see that as nothing but good.
I recently made a trade of Dansby Swanson for Chance Sisco. Dansby's bat wasn't great but he played fantastic defense and that has greater value now. On my end, I was willing to take on Sisco and his pitiful 160 offensive at bats because that has value in our present league because of the scarcity of good players at this position. I decided I would rather fill those at bats with a player with more upside than duke it out for backups who will always be back ups. That choice is interesting. That choice brings intrigue. That is a different way to manage the back end of the catching position. Those are trades that mean something with 20 teams but it may have not been made with only 16. If it was, it probably would have been done more on the prospect level than anytihng else. Again, thats an interesting thing that adds to the complexity of the league in a positive way.
Every year I have had a hole in my lineup. I believe Kyle even wrote about that phenomenon this last year. More teams will mean more holes. How I choose to fill them, where I choose that hole to be, etc., will only add to the intrigue and give us a chance to show off our skills and knowledge. Most anyone can pick All-Stars. We are way more than that. We all have greater skills than that. Looking at a deeper list of players in a deeper way adds a complexity sets us apart. We probably all have different reasons for what draws us here. But this is a big one for me and I'd guess it places high on the list for many of you also.
I do think we will get to a point where the negatives of adding outweigh the positives. Some of you think we are already there. I don't see us there yet. I think there is more to this thing than we've tapped. Plus we can always use more potential writers on the beat (I'm thinking of you three guys waiting in the wings). 
Anyways, that's my two cents but I would like to leave on this note. I am more than fine going with the consensus of the group on this topic. I think expansion would be a positive, but what we have going right now ain't to shabby.
Topic: Expansion - Round 2 (Read 4266 times)
previous topic - next topic
