I've played Yahoo fantasy baseball for several years now. Yahoo is far superior to ESPN.com in every single imaginable way. Depending on how many teams would be in the league, I would think we would need more than 3 starting pitchers. We have 10 guys in our league every year, and we have 5 starters and 2 closers. Pitching depth is the most valuable thing to have in fantasy baseball. With only three starters, it really dilutes the value. We set our lineup weekly, which would make a difference too, I guess. If you guys were planning on setting the lineup daily, that would change things considerably.

If we play head to head in football, we might as well play head to head in baseball. Football is by far the most random fantasy sport of them all. A stacked team can get their ass kicked single-handedly by someone who picks up Sam Gado and gets 3 tds out of him. In baseball, with a week-long scoring period, the better team wins most of the time. One big game out of some stiff can't single-handedly carry a team to victory. If some stiff puts up big numbers all week long and helps defeat an alleged superior team, then that team probably deserved to lose that week anyways. Just like football, you still pay out regular season champ by most total points. I agree, total points is by far the best way to determine who has the best team, but if people have more fun playing head to head, then why prevent them from doing so. Having fun is the whole purpose of playing fantasy sports anyways. Espeically when there is no reward for winning.