Not to worry, I won't stop a sound and polite discussion about a hot topic like this one. The problem here is that we still haven't decided if a LCD + blank lineup is something we'd like to ban/stop/prevent. Since it's not a completely legitimate tactic per se, I'm willing to have a bit of risk involved with it. Consider it a price for using it and yeah, sometimes it can backfire.
In a sense, though, it seems like the whole point of LCD should be to allow the coach to decide everything, and giving him up to 12 players to play in a match and letting him choose what he's going to do doesn't seem like it's a bad thing necessarily. I think that it's more an indictment of the substitution patterns in the other methods. While it's not at all advisable to be able to manage to the minute how much your players play, it would enhance gameplay in my mind to be able to say that you want your PG starter to play until he's too tired to walk the court but you want your PFs to rotate every opportunity, and a third position go with a traditional starter-backup rotation. Especially since we have no mechanism to lower stamina on a player, and it's very difficult to get a high stamina starter to play under 40 minutes if it's not a blowout win.
The thing that I would think would be more a question is whether walkovers are something to ban/stop/prevent, as that's far less legitimate a tactic - and there's way too little repercussions for giving up a walkover as it stands. I would think that a full lineup of lucky fans could instead be fielded, but the lucky fans need to have their agreeability/aggressiveness modified so the injuries and fouls are tuned way down. And of course there should be punishment for those who set walkovers as well, but there's plenty of talk in the suggestions forum on that already and this seems like it's already veered enough.