My first point addresses your assessment of the top teams. Sure most of the top teams do not probably daytrade, but at the same time those teams have been around for very many seasons. The issue of daytrading more applies to those teams that are trying to move up quicker than probably possible without daytrading. It's not those that are ahead that try to work the system usually, but those that are behind. I find no relevance in that research personally because of those reasons.
Since people have the ability to choose their own price to start the auction out at, I think the liquidity of the market wouldn't be affected quite as much as you may think. I'm okay putting a player on the market as long as I can choose the lowest price I'm willing to take for him...therefore keeping the market liquid. Now, if you are saying that less transfers will happen because bargains will be harder to come by...then maybe, but that only leads to a more true and fair market, right? No matter what you do free agents will often times go as bargains and that can't be controlled, but it will reward those looking very thoroughly for players. I have benefited from free agents before, but also got overzealous and bought someone that didn't fit the roster all because I thought I was getting a fair price. Luckily I sold the guy and broke about even...only 2 or 3 weeks later. I paid the price.
Now no matter what ends up happening, I'm all for an idea that curbs daytrading. I do like the idea proposed that calls for newly acquired players to be taxed or resold for a lower percentage than the standard 79% or 80%. When people can make an easy 2-3 million in less than a week, then I think something needs to change. This will make people more sure when they buy on the market as well...and I'm including myself in this.
Anyway, just my two cents. Hope something is able to change. I do like the roster ideas earlier in the thread as well.