Sign in to follow this  
Code of Hammurabi

NL & AL Only leagues - Why? Rationale and Support?

Recommended Posts

It's a bigger challenge. Anyone can play a 10 team mixed league and win because the waiver wire is always stacked with good players. Playing in an only league takes that away since there is pretty much no one on the wire most of the year. Playing a deep only league adds the extra challenge of finding the gems. It's more fun that mixed leagues IMO. My NL only league is by far my favorite league I play in.

The big problem is that injuries can be a HUGE factor in who wins the league. If your team has a star or two get hurt, or even solid contributors, forget about it, because the WW is filled with crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bigger challenge. Anyone can play a 10 team mixed league and win because the waiver wire is always stacked with good players. Playing in an only league takes that away since there is pretty much no one on the wire most of the year. Playing a deep only league adds the extra challenge of finding the gems. It's more fun that mixed leagues IMO. My NL only league is by far my favorite league I play in.

I understand now the why for the first time. But playing in a 16 to 20 team (or more) mixed league does the same thing.

After playing in an AL only league two years ago that became one first and last adventure into Onlyland. Too few owners to make trades with. Too few teams to play against. So I prefer a deeper mixed league myself because I like it harder to find the players and an interesting FA pool full of possibilities more than names. And plugged into all of baseball and not just half of it.

So since you can get those same values in mixed leages, is it that Only league owners prefer fewer teams in a league? I could see it if a league was built just around some friends in real life. But if not, is there any reason then the one above to prefer it?

In the old days when there was no inter-league play and less access to games from the "other" league in a person's viewing area and the net was still very young, It makes sense. But now everyone pretty much can see any player any time or at least do good research on them.

Agree. but i think the assumption is that these are "hometown" leagues..where the owners are all at a live draft of some sort and it might be next to impossible to find more than 12 people who want to play fantasy baseball. I know this from the experience of my local league.

Edited by Mithrandir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bigger challenge. Anyone can play a 10 team mixed league and win because the waiver wire is always stacked with good players. Playing in an only league takes that away since there is pretty much no one on the wire most of the year. Playing a deep only league adds the extra challenge of finding the gems. It's more fun that mixed leagues IMO. My NL only league is by far my favorite league I play in.

I understand now the why for the first time. But playing in a 16 to 20 team (or more) mixed league does the same thing.

After playing in an AL only league two years ago that became one first and last adventure into Onlyland. Too few owners to make trades with. Too few teams to play against. So I prefer a deeper mixed league myself because I like it harder to find the players and an interesting FA pool full of possibilities more than names. And plugged into all of baseball and not just half of it.

So since you can get those same values in mixed leages, is it that Only league owners prefer fewer teams in a league? I could see it if a league was built just around some friends in real life. But if not, is there any reason then the one above to prefer it?

In the old days when there was no inter-league play and less access to games from the "other" league in a person's viewing area and the net was still very young, It makes sense. But now everyone pretty much can see any player any time or at least do good research on them.

Agree. but i think the assumption is that these are "hometown" leagues..where the owners are all at a live draft of some sort and it might be next to impossible to find more than 12 people who want to play fantasy baseball. I know this from the experience of my local league.

Yeah I agree it makes sense if it is a hometown league. Something I also never want to play in as I prefer to meet new people and play against owners from all over the country and beyond. But I agree if it is a friends league and you can't get enough people, makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bigger challenge. Anyone can play a 10 team mixed league and win because the waiver wire is always stacked with good players. Playing in an only league takes that away since there is pretty much no one on the wire most of the year. Playing a deep only league adds the extra challenge of finding the gems. It's more fun that mixed leagues IMO. My NL only league is by far my favorite league I play in.

The big problem is that injuries can be a HUGE factor in who wins the league. If your team has a star or two get hurt, or even solid contributors, forget about it, because the WW is filled with crap.

Finding gems makes a bigger difference than injuries/busts when it comes to who wins. Guys like Corbin, Fernandez, Carlos Gomez, Puig, Joe Kelly, and other breakout stars from last year play a big role when it comes to who is in contention to win at the end of the year. Sort of a CSB, but I spent most of my draft day budget on BJ Upton and Starlin Castro last year and still won the league because I owned multiple players that carried me at different parts of the year (Corbin, EY, Adams, Henderson/Brothers/Hawkins/Mujica)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bigger challenge. Anyone can play a 10 team mixed league and win because the waiver wire is always stacked with good players. Playing in an only league takes that away since there is pretty much no one on the wire most of the year. Playing a deep only league adds the extra challenge of finding the gems. It's more fun that mixed leagues IMO. My NL only league is by far my favorite league I play in.

I understand now the why for the first time. But playing in a 16 to 20 team (or more) mixed league does the same thing.

After playing in an AL only league two years ago that became one first and last adventure into Onlyland. Too few owners to make trades with. Too few teams to play against. So I prefer a deeper mixed league myself because I like it harder to find the players and an interesting FA pool full of possibilities more than names. And plugged into all of baseball and not just half of it.

So since you can get those same values in mixed leages, is it that Only league owners prefer fewer teams in a league? I could see it if a league was built just around some friends in real life. But if not, is there any reason then the one above to prefer it?

In the old days when there was no inter-league play and less access to games from the "other" league in a person's viewing area and the net was still very young, It makes sense. But now everyone pretty much can see any player any time or at least do good research on them.

Also what Bud said about trades to another league. That must be horrible for the owner of a Fister or Trumbo (or an actual consistent hitter, just grabbing a guy on the fly). Plus in season trades would be really rough.

Having played AL-only for 20+ years until last season, I can tell you that having a smaller league with owners you know was the main driving force at that time. Plus, remember that a smaller league also allows a lot of them to do LIVE drafts, or live auctions - which is still the most fun way to draft - it's just logistically difficult, if not impossible to get 16+ owners (even 12 is a challenge) to be available at the same time. Plus, to reiterate a point I alluded to in 2012 - I'd rather play in an AL-only league with 8 owners who are all active and committed than play in a 16-20 team mixed league where 5-6 owners mail it in (along with live draft logistics, those are the 2 major points in favor of keeping AL-only or NL-only leagues).

Re: being traded away to the to the other league, most sites allow you to count the stats of players in the other league for the rest of the season. It sucks from a keeper perspective, but there's no reason why trades should affect the outcomes for the current year anymore. Those are antiquated rules, well before advances in league scoring tracking allowed players to stay as counting (for the first 10+ years, most FFB stats were done by HAND from Baseball Weekly monthly stat calculation. :blink:).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bigger challenge. Anyone can play a 10 team mixed league and win because the waiver wire is always stacked with good players. Playing in an only league takes that away since there is pretty much no one on the wire most of the year. Playing a deep only league adds the extra challenge of finding the gems. It's more fun that mixed leagues IMO. My NL only league is by far my favorite league I play in.

I understand now the why for the first time. But playing in a 16 to 20 team (or more) mixed league does the same thing.

After playing in an AL only league two years ago that became one first and last adventure into Onlyland. Too few owners to make trades with. Too few teams to play against. So I prefer a deeper mixed league myself because I like it harder to find the players and an interesting FA pool full of possibilities more than names. And plugged into all of baseball and not just half of it.

So since you can get those same values in mixed leages, is it that Only league owners prefer fewer teams in a league? I could see it if a league was built just around some friends in real life. But if not, is there any reason then the one above to prefer it?

In the old days when there was no inter-league play and less access to games from the "other" league in a person's viewing area and the net was still very young, It makes sense. But now everyone pretty much can see any player any time or at least do good research on them.

Also what Bud said about trades to another league. That must be horrible for the owner of a Fister or Trumbo (or an actual consistent hitter, just grabbing a guy on the fly). Plus in season trades would be really rough.

That is true about less ppl to trade with. Also, although it is always competitive in the end it seems, one person seems to run away with first place for the majority of the season more often than in mixed, it seems.

While I miss getting access to all the players in the draft, the one benefit in a draft is you don't have to wait 10-12 picks for your next pick, I don't miss that part when I do one league only.

What was said by Mith is kind of true though, although in a 12-16 team league you're going to have more scrubs and mediocre players so you're superstar player is pretty important, too.

But one league only does have its drawbacks in the draft, particularly in the first round. Last year in the AL I ended up picking #4 and after Trout, Miggy and Cano came off the board, the next 3 guys were Pujols, Fielder and Verlander. Huge difference picking 4th than the first 3. Tbh I can't remember who was the first pick last year in NL but I was 3rd I think and chose Kemp, I'm sure whoever was 1st was significantly better than Kemp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a preference to type of fantasy leagues but I just like em' deep. 2 of my bball leagues are 16 teamers, 2 of my baseball leagues are league-only (1 NL, 1 AL) with 40 players per roster. I just consider them challenging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can definitely see the merit in having less owners with a deep league feel, especially if it results in more live drafts (which are always more fun).

The changing of leagues thing bothers me too much though. I guess you can say it's no different than a major injury to your player. Either way, it would be hard to account for. Also the idea of being lucky in having a high waiver priority pick in a year when someone big changes leagues, just doesn't appeal to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can definitely see the merit in having less owners with a deep league feel, especially if it results in more live drafts (which are always more fun).

The changing of leagues thing bothers me too much though. I guess you can say it's no different than a major injury to your player. Either way, it would be hard to account for. Also the idea of being lucky in having a high waiver priority pick in a year when someone big changes leagues, just doesn't appeal to me.

The AL and NL leagues with the same managers gets rid of a lot of that.^^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can definitely see the merit in having less owners with a deep league feel, especially if it results in more live drafts (which are always more fun).

The changing of leagues thing bothers me too much though. I guess you can say it's no different than a major injury to your player. Either way, it would be hard to account for. Also the idea of being lucky in having a high waiver priority pick in a year when someone big changes leagues, just doesn't appeal to me.

The AL and NL leagues with the same managers gets rid of a lot of that.^^^

Yeah no doubt, but thats a very unique way of playing that's hard to convince a lot of people to do. I mean I wish i had 7 friends who were down for that. I could probably find 3 and it would take a campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play one mixed, one Only. I enjoy both, but i do probably enjoy the mixed better. The mixed seems to minimize the injury-luck factor. In my 15 team mixed, I want to own Utley. And I then want to back him up with Rendon. In my NL-only, I will own Utley and my backup will be Jamey Carroll. On the wire will be Alexei Amarista and Cesar Hernandez. Maybe. At times, the NL-only feels like playing at the $1-3 poker table, where guys ride their 9-7 off to the river no matter the bet. The mixed feels like the $5-10 table where 9-7 off is mucked faster than Shia Labeouf's career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play one mixed, one Only. I enjoy both, but i do probably enjoy the mixed better. The mixed seems to minimize the injury-luck factor. In my 15 team mixed, I want to own Utley. And I then want to back him up with Rendon. In my NL-only, I will own Utley and my backup will be Jamey Carroll. On the wire will be Alexei Amarista and Cesar Hernandez. Maybe. At times, the NL-only feels like playing at the $1-3 poker table, where guys ride their 9-7 off to the river no matter the bet. The mixed feels like the $5-10 table where 9-7 off is mucked faster than Shia Labeouf's career.

Hey, I paid $4 for Alexi Amarista last year! In an NL-only, cheap picks like that can win you the league. The $3 Pat Corbin or $1 Edward Mujica make all the difference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Main reason for me, that I likle "Only" Leagues better: You have to put forth the research and work in order to win a Championship. Whereas, in Mixed Leagues, generally that's not always the case. Half the managers in Mixed Leagues will have 'all-star' type lineups...because there's soooo many more players in the pool. In 'Only' Leagues, the managers who pick up the no-names who later turn out to be gems, are the winners more often than not. And that makes a huge difference when competing against fellow managers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could design the dream league, I think it would be to take the 12-13 owners we have now, and have 2 leagues, an AL only and NL only.

- Auction Roto, each owner has an NL Team and an AL Team. If a player gets traded or signs in offseason, he is the property of your franchise in the otehr league.

- It would be fun because you would have two teams going at once with two chances to win money, maybe one team could be in a rebuilding year while the other is a contender.

- In addition to the roto, have some sort of World Series tournament at the end for also a cash prize, but the maority would go to the roto of each league.

This is an awesome idea! I would love to play in a league just like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Also the idea of being lucky in having a high waiver priority pick in a year when someone big changes leagues, just doesn't appeal to me.

Personally, both my leagues are FAAB, so that eliminates this problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could design the dream league, I think it would be to take the 12-13 owners we have now, and have 2 leagues, an AL only and NL only.

- Auction Roto, each owner has an NL Team and an AL Team. If a player gets traded or signs in offseason, he is the property of your franchise in the otehr league.

- It would be fun because you would have two teams going at once with two chances to win money, maybe one team could be in a rebuilding year while the other is a contender.

- In addition to the roto, have some sort of World Series tournament at the end for also a cash prize, but the maority would go to the roto of each league.

This is an awesome idea! I would love to play in a legue just like this.

My local league discussed this years ago...never went anywhere with it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could design the dream league, I think it would be to take the 12-13 owners we have now, and have 2 leagues, an AL only and NL only.

- Auction Roto, each owner has an NL Team and an AL Team. If a player gets traded or signs in offseason, he is the property of your franchise in the otehr league.

- It would be fun because you would have two teams going at once with two chances to win money, maybe one team could be in a rebuilding year while the other is a contender.

- In addition to the roto, have some sort of World Series tournament at the end for also a cash prize, but the maority would go to the roto of each league.

This is an awesome idea! I would love to play in a legue just like this.

My local league discussed this years ago...never went anywhere with it though.

I would definitely be interested in trying to start up a league like this if we had enough people who wanted to give it a shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Also the idea of being lucky in having a high waiver priority pick in a year when someone big changes leagues, just doesn't appeal to me.

Personally, both my leagues are FAAB, so that eliminates this problem

Do some people not hoard their money all year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Also the idea of being lucky in having a high waiver priority pick in a year when someone big changes leagues, just doesn't appeal to me.

Personally, both my leagues are FAAB, so that eliminates this problem

Do some people not hoard their money all year?

Some will play this way sure. You CAN find diamonds in the rough for $0, basically just rewards the more dedicated owner. The guy who got Adrian Gonzalez when he switched, he did go all-in, I want to say somewhere in the range of $224/$250 cap for season. I lost Greinke in '12 when he got traded to Angels, thats the price you pay for drafting someone continuously in trade talks. -Only leagues are a bit more challenging, which is the main reason I play. I only play in one NL-Only but yet to get past 5th place there whereas I have definitely won more at mixed, either roto or H2H.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Also the idea of being lucky in having a high waiver priority pick in a year when someone big changes leagues, just doesn't appeal to me.

Personally, both my leagues are FAAB, so that eliminates this problem

Do some people not hoard their money all year?

yes, but that is risky thing to do in a competitive league. Since you will have a lot more holes in your roster than the guy who is willing to throw a few bucks to a bunch of lower guys with jobs...

You basically have to have that person give you more Cat juice to be worth it. Sometimes. That doesn't balance out..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Also the idea of being lucky in having a high waiver priority pick in a year when someone big changes leagues, just doesn't appeal to me.

Personally, both my leagues are FAAB, so that eliminates this problem

Do some people not hoard their money all year?

When I was in an AL only league way back when (the Brewers were still in the AL) the answer is guys traded over are not eligible for pick up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As many have said, the great thing about only leagues, is just the depth to which you must go in the guys drafted. I was in an AL-Only league, 12 owners in the mid 1990's. Auction, roto 23 active spots, 2 catchers, a 2-C league thats 24 catchers when you have 14 total with a starting job. It is crazy the guys you get excited about, the little things.

There are 42 Starting OF, we need 60.

If a guy simply HAD a starting job, that made him extremely valuable in that format.

Only leagues have a couple issues:

1. The Trade thing - if it isnt done right, it can be a league killer. I personally make guys coming over as frozen, cant be picked up and guys traded away their stats keep running that season. As a commish and league you have to think the intent of the "only" format is to go deeper in your player pool not have the outcome altered because your guy gets dealt away or you drop some long reliever for Doug Fister.

2. Because guys dealt are so much more of an impact, like if you trade an expiring star in an only league, it has such implications because you are usually dealing it and taking on true horrific players in return plus some minor leaguers, maybe a keeper or two, picks, etc. So the hard part is nobody likes Vetoes, but you need some protection in those leagues, because 1 guy has such a massive impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about smaller more committed leagues being the better experience. And with smaller numbers of teams, you can split the player pool in half and still get that deep experience.

My problem with trying to join one of these AL or NL only leagues, is that it's virtually impossible to find one where the rules are traditional/straight forward.

e.g.

I would love to join an "only" league that has the same basic structure as a typical public mixed league, where it's all very straightforward and simple.

Anytime I try to find an NL only league or AL only league, there's always a bible of rules in the league, with exotic roster formats, and dynasty/keeper format, etc.

I want to join a 10 team al or 10 team nl only league (or both) with very committed owners, and just have the league be a simple redraft that follow the basic structure of Yahoo's default leagues.

A simple 5x5, 10 teams, 10 active hitters, 9 active pitchers, NL only, with default $100 FAAB budget, and the league be a simple redraft with a $260 auction live draft.

These types of leagues are impossible to find.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As many have said, the great thing about only leagues, is just the depth to which you must go in the guys drafted. I was in an AL-Only league, 12 owners in the mid 1990's. Auction, roto 23 active spots, 2 catchers, a 2-C league thats 24 catchers when you have 14 total with a starting job. It is crazy the guys you get excited about, the little things.

There are 42 Starting OF, we need 60.

If a guy simply HAD a starting job, that made him extremely valuable in that format.

Only leagues have a couple issues:

1. The Trade thing - if it isnt done right, it can be a league killer. I personally make guys coming over as frozen, cant be picked up and guys traded away their stats keep running that season. As a commish and league you have to think the intent of the "only" format is to go deeper in your player pool not have the outcome altered because your guy gets dealt away or you drop some long reliever for Doug Fister.

Is there even a way to do that in like yahoo or espn leagues or do you have to have some other less used system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As many have said, the great thing about only leagues, is just the depth to which you must go in the guys drafted. I was in an AL-Only league, 12 owners in the mid 1990's. Auction, roto 23 active spots, 2 catchers, a 2-C league thats 24 catchers when you have 14 total with a starting job. It is crazy the guys you get excited about, the little things.

There are 42 Starting OF, we need 60.

If a guy simply HAD a starting job, that made him extremely valuable in that format.

Only leagues have a couple issues:

1. The Trade thing - if it isnt done right, it can be a league killer. I personally make guys coming over as frozen, cant be picked up and guys traded away their stats keep running that season. As a commish and league you have to think the intent of the "only" format is to go deeper in your player pool not have the outcome altered because your guy gets dealt away or you drop some long reliever for Doug Fister.

Is there even a way to do that in like yahoo or espn leagues or do you have to have some other less used system?

It's a standard in paysites - CBS, Fantrax & OnRoto all have that feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this