How many roster slots in a 14 team league?

[ff330]

Hopefully get some responses here or in one of the other forums.

I'm the LM in an ESPN (fun not $$) non-PPR 1QB dynasty league. We have 14 teams (down from 16 about 5 years ago) with 20 roster slots.

I brought up the idea of dropping the DST slot in favor of an additional offensive player and adding one more bench spot for a total of 22.

My concern is having the league run low on available talent by "deleting" 28 more players from the waiver wire and free agent pool.

How many of you with 14 plus teams in their leagues have rosters of more than 20 or feel there is enough talent out there to support a larger roster of possibly 22 players?

How many have dropped the DST slot for another bench player?

Appreciate some feedback.

[killer_of_giants]

i play mostly in 14 teams leagues (and non-ppr). many are IDP so that skews things a bit.

in non IDP leagues, i have one where we've trimmed rosters from 27 to 22 by "popular" demand (vote went 8/6) and i hate it. one less roster spot and i'm leaving. the reasoning was that one of the finalists had injury issues and couldn't pick up anyone decent to fill a RB spot... (best available right now, with the trim down, are boston scott, rico dowdle and craig reynolds... good luck with that!).

in another we have 30 roster spots, but with D and K, so equivalent to about 26 roster spots. FAAB isn't very important, but there's still a lot of waiver movements every week.

My concern is having the league run low on available talent by "deleting" 28 more players from the waiver wire and free agent pool.

well then, don't add any roster spots.
i don't get the concern though: players you'd like to own shouldn't be added and dropped numerous times, the waiver wire isn't a community bench. you have your team and that's it, depth is important. if it sucks, trade. if you have needs, trade.

of course, that's just my point of view. if you want teams to be able to pick up emergency starters from waivers, then i wouldn't add much to the 20 roster spots.

[tstafford]

I agree that if you have over 300 players rostered w/o DST and K that the WW is going to be pretty thin. It won't be completely devoid because people will (naturally) have the "wrong" end of bench guys because it's so unpredictable.

If you want players on the WW who can serve as injury/bye-week fill-ins don't add roster spots. I've played in 12-team, 20 spot leagues and the WW is a "community bench" (I like that term).

There's no right or wrong answer. It's just about what you want.

My take - the more serious your league mates are about dynasty, the more roster spots you should have. If it's casual and folks aren't paying close attention, I'd lean toward a slightly more robust WW as a safety net.

[Anteaters]

There's no right or wrong answer. It's just about what you want.

My take - the more serious your league mates are about dynasty, the more roster spots you should have. If it's casual and folks aren't paying close attention, I'd lean toward a slightly more robust WW as a safety net.

THIS!

You have to know your members. Not every league has to be full of cutthroat opportunists who study fantasy football like it's their jobs and are always ready to make an immediate ww add minutes after a star player's injury is announced. BTW, I'm not disparaging such people because a lot of that describes me.

I'm okay with almost any rule or roster limit, because all managers in the league have to follow the same rules. In the end, a skilled manager will come out ahead more times than not, whatever the rules are. Having a "community bench" doesn't give the casual manager a true advantage if they're picking up Dowdle (while Pollard is healthy) to be their bye-week RB2 and I (who drafted/managed my roster well) am able to start Dobbins (my 3rd RB) at RB2 during bye weeks.

The casual guy will always be at a disadvantage to the more serious fantasy players. Proactive management will usually win out over the "community bench". If having a community bench keeps a few of the casual guys content enough to keep donating their money year after year, that's a good thing as far as I'm concerned.

[81-]

The more the merrier would be my desire. We only do twenty spots. I'd love 25 or 30

[Hottoddies]

The most interesting part of dynasty is the ability to find future prospects and build enduring lineups. The bigger the rosters, the more latitude you have to plan your approach. For dynasty, I need room to play and size does matter.

[thebeast]

Three 16 team leagues. No IDP, no DST or K. All roster 24 players. Seems to work well. There are stil waiver claims most weeks.