Markos wrote: I'm talking about injury coverage. It's a fatal shortcoming of daily leagues IMO. So is the complete incapacity of GM's to both contend and stash a long term prospect. I didn't suggest weekly leagues just for a giggle.
I think you're overselling the impact. Guys get injured every year, and if it's a top end guy you're probably screwed regardless of which kind of player subs the league is using. Some teams have injured guys and still mange to do quite well too. Above and beyond that, NBA teams have to deal with
Oh, and Rudy Gay got injured last season, and was replaced by Tony Allen. For about 2 or 3 months from memory. But yeah, I pulled the example out of thin air, and used the example of 1 month, not 3, somehow implying bigger numbers. Fantastic logic, thanks for discussing the issue with an even keel.
Yes, i realize that Allen replaced Gay in the Griz lineup.
I was talking about your specific example where we were talking about a couple of games. Anyway, there's no question that weekly subs allows to carry injured players with less consequence over the bulk of a season - that's certainly the case and you won't see me try to prove otherwise. My issues with weekly subs lie elsewhere.
Markos wrote:In a nutshell, having my opponent's scrubs go up against mine for an extra 1.5 games a week each for some extra cookies simply isn't worth being stuck with injured guys getting DNP's for months, or being unable to stash a rook.
Backing out of this for now, probably need to get some other voices in here and see if the weekly format garners enough support for a vote or whatever.
See I'd disagree abouyt the value of being able to sub in my bench guys to my hearts content, but I think that's the main difference of opinion here, so no surprise.
By all means lets let some other people chime in and where we stand. I might not like weekly subs, but I'll roll with what the league wants with no complaints.