Which would you rather?

[40nidesrever]

Pros or prospects?

I've dumped alot of stars off of my dynasty to make room for future stars who get better rather then decline. Like, I'm the Red Sox, and my line-up is as follows:

Ichiro

Rickie Weeks

Vladdy

Pujols

Papi (I cant bring myself to trade him)

BJ Upton

Akira Kawaski (I dunno where he came from, but I got him from the dodgers)

Wily Mo Pena/Brad Barnes/Steve Brassard

Bronson Williams/Joe Mauer when he gets off the DL

Obviously we all need our stars, but the name you may not know gain 10 contact/power a season so in 1-2 more seasons (I'm in 2007) I'll have a team of all-stars.

But is it better to just get the best each season, rather then wait for progression to take its course?

[Viceman2004]

I like to have a mix of both.

[Sean O]

With a high-payroll team, I will trade some of my less useful or utility players for prospects, while in low-payroll teams I dump everyone making over 4 million a year or that's over 24. The game becomes ridiculously easy by about 2007 when everyone has 90+ contact / power.

As an example, in my dynasty, just by using free agency and 2 or 3 good trades, my Royals just won the Series. Got Bonderman, Beckett and Miguel Cabrera in free agency, and I already had Greinke, so my first round pick from finishing last in 2005 was a ridiculously good pitcher, so that's 4 great starters right there.

Depends on the situation, but BJ Upton is a must.

[Emil]

With a high-payroll team, I will trade some of my less useful or utility players for prospects, while in low-payroll teams I dump everyone making over 4 million a year or that's over 24. The game becomes ridiculously easy by about 2007 when everyone has 90+ contact / power.

Downlad the progression file.

[Jagg76]

I acquired BJ Upton (Red Sox Owner Mode) and he won 3 consecutive MVP awards!!!