I don't know why we cut off acquisitions in the playoffs. We limit the top six and we prohibit acquisitions in the consolation rounds. What's the point of that limitation? Your third baseman goes down and so you're supposed to play without one? It makes no sense.

Our playoffs are anti-climatic largely because it's just people rotating their lineups as anyone should do. If you have the money, you should be able to drop and add players. Can someone give me a good reason why you shouldn't be able to do that?

For a long time there were no play-off adds allowed. That was a curious rule...

There has to be a cap on pitcher acquisitions of two. Otherwise, I'm not sure. But then again I haven't noticed anyone complaining about only having two. I think the concern ultimately is not replacing injured players, it's using a bunch of acquisitions in a strategic way.

Many, me included, do not like pitcher churning in the playoffs. The new roster expansion should alleviate some of the stress from add/drop limitations.

Consolation bracket < championship bracket, thus more limitations.

It is certainly more flexible than it was - not only did we not allow playoff acquisitions, we stopped acquisitions with one week left in the regular season.

If it's of interest, here's the rundown of acquired players during the playoffs:

12 Pitchers (I'm pretty sure there were starts involved in all of them).
4 Outfielders
1 Utility (ss/3b/of)

So basically (mostly) streaming of pitchers. Which was the primary concern of allowing people to add players in the play-offs in the first place, just streaming guys to affect play-off outcomes rather than building teams. I think we already have a good balance right now of a max of 2 adds total per play-off round. You can sub for injured players and streaming is not out of control.

By the way, when I was playing the Wolfdogs Ryan added two guys that got two starts in our match on the day before the play-offs. Otherwise, he would have had a 4-5 start deficit. And that was fine, totally legal. Owners are always going to manipulate the rules as much as they can to help them win. So when you're thinking what about if I get a bunch of injured players, well, you have to keep in mind how owners (if more than 2 players can be added per play-off week) may manipulate the game in ways we don't want it to be manipulated...

George's Amendment Proposal:

Playoff acquisitions are unlimited but are subject to increasing costs. Each additional playoff acquisition increases cost by $1.

I was perusing the constitution and noticed it says playoff acquisitions cannot be rolled over (2 per round, period). This last year, I allowed rollovers. I guess I should have read the Constitution a bit closer. I'm ok either way but if we want rollovers, we'll need to vote on it. If George's amendment passes, this point is moot.

This boils down to: "more options = more fun." Money becomes worthless, but it doesn't have to. If we keep money a part of the game throughout that means it has extra value at the end, which provide more options, makes more fun, and adds an extra dimension to the game.