Yeah, I'd noticed that strategy too after I was surprised to sell a couple scrubs, and investigated where they went. Likewise not a fan. No realism in that 8-)
Indeed I know there are costs to high roster turnover and such, certainly the roster movement still seems to be paying large dividends for you though, and it just doesn't match what I'd think the intentions of the game.
Am I vehemently upset at you for doing it?
Nah, it's life, and if there's a loophole people will take advantage of it. Does it mean doing it is a good thing? No, not to me. But you are free to make your choices, and you are winning/funded because of it :-)
Likewise, I do play about 48 for my 6, but I don't set them to the only player at that position (and should think realistically that it would be bad for them). I get close to 48 generally, a few a tad over, a few a tad under, and my training seems to go just fine imo. I'm not fully convinced (or at least I hope) that 48 isn't necessarily/certainly THE magic number, that sometimes it might be under or particularly over by at least a few minutes. But I know stats haven't shown this.
I'm still not convinced in the long run that your strategies will pay off with you, namely because I philosophically think finding loopholes usually comes back to bite people/some image of karma (though I'm not Buddhist, far from it... but just in justice in general, in the very long run). And the fact you have so many old guys kind (and particularly as you say, you don't have a lot of money) kind of soothes me that it's true. Whether or not that's true, I do see some of the higher ups succeeding with some of these strategies, wish it wasn't that way, but so be it.
Coincidentally, you are right, I didn't realize it wasn't so much daytrading, and that makes me content more, as its not quite as illegitimate of a strategy (underline quite). The fact your net balance isn't huge really cleans that fear.
And I trained my guards (admittedly older) too, and they're quite solid in themselves. Will be interesting when/if we meet in the playoffs 8-) Particularly since I gave you your closest league game of the year (FC though in the league cup is duly noted). Training out a well-rounded team myself over the years might just pay off.
Then again, how'd that work out for the Pacers in the 90s 8-) [ok, it did work for the Knicks, Spurs, etc to some degree!].
All in all, not griping, just discussing. Whatever the method, you've done a surprising/amazing job winning so much as such a young team. I was stunned when you came up here first and owned us, I thought Oak and I (and Wolfpack) had continued to improve while we worked through promotion years for two teams I thought were great (coincidentally, they haven't fared so well at D III, so maybe not as much as I thought) [one got relegated back here, and so therein owned us twice]. Last season I thought you were strong, but beatable, and so I wasn't worried about it for my team's success, enjoyed it. This season I see you're development curve has continued to explode, and you seem to have us all in the dust.
That said, I'm still holding faint visions inside of beating you in April 8-)