BBKL policy for Centers and Wingers

[Robin Hood]

pFOR = previous face off ratio
FOT = face-off-taken

pFOR = 2010-2011 FOT/TOI
FOR = 26-29GP of the 2011-2012 season = FOT/TOI

Okay then I clearly did it wrong lol. NVM

[Chris]

Brandon McMillan:
pFOR = .346 (<.4)
2011-12 FOR = .23

24 games played, with two more to go. Early request to have him switched for next week.

[Chris]

Another question: Cody Eakin has played 17 games so far as a winger (which is what he should be listed as if the CC weren't a bunch of self-congratulating assholes) so far this year. After the Capitals play 30 games, he will be ineligible to play as a winger until the ASB. He has taken only 10 faceoffs in more than 170 minutes of ice-time. At what point are you people going to admit that this system is flawed and penalizes teams for being smart enough to know when a player is a natural winger?

[Mike]

Brandon McMillan:
pFOR = .346 (<.4)
2011-12 FOR = .23

24 games played, with two more to go. Early request to have him switched for next week.

[Mike]

Another question: Cody Eakin has played 17 games so far as a winger (which is what he should be listed as if the CC weren't a bunch of self-congratulating assholes) so far this year. After the Capitals play 30 games, he will be ineligible to play as a winger until the ASB. He has taken only 10 faceoffs in more than 170 minutes of ice-time. At what point are you people going to admit that this system is flawed and penalizes teams for being smart enough to know when a player is a natural winger?

See above.

[Chris]

NHL teams are now reaching the 26gp mark, so the gates are open for potential early updates from C to W of players belonging to the 2 categories eligible:
- centers whose FOR was <.4 in the season used to determine their current position
- bbkl rookies (to be precise: centers who played less than 26 games the previous season and never reached 40 gp in one NHL season; i.e. centers whose position is still determined off nhl.com draft lists, or off CBS for undrafted players).

Remember that to be credited with the position switch the eligible player (see above) must satisfy both following conditions:
1) the number of NHL games he has played during the current RS has to be in between 26-29
2) his corrispondent FOR for the current season must be below 0.3


if your player is compliant, please fill the following form and post it here to request the update:

Player's name: xxxxxx xxxxxxx
Category: 'rookie' or pFOR = x.xx
2011/12 #GP: xx
2011/12 FOR: x.xx
NHLteam FOlink: e.g. http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.htm? ... centageAll

pFOR stands for the FOR of the season used to determined his current status.


Requests that will not provide all the data specified in the above form will not be considered.

Once the request is checked and approved the player will be switched from C to W until the ASG break at least, when further review will automatically apply (without request).

Please remind you will be allowed to use your player only in the specified position no matter if CBS leaves you the option of setting a different one too.

Jesus fucking Christ. Why the fuck are we even bothering with this fucking convoluted bullshit? "Here's what you have to do. You have to waste your time posting links and checking GP and shit because, I, as head of the competition committee, need to be validated by 29 other strangers on the internet so I can feel better about my position as a BBKL statistician. I'm also gay."

Fuck this. Go calculate your own shit with the numbers I provided.

[Chris]

"BAH BAH BAH I CONTRIBUTED TO THE EVOLUTION OF HUMANITY BY CO-CREATING A STUPID ALGORITHM THAT DETERMINES POSITIONAL ELIGIBILITY, THEREBY IGNORING THAT HOCKEY IS A SPONTANEOUS SPORT AND BY DOING SO, I CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND THINGS I DON'T REALLY HAVE A FUCKING CLUE ABOUT. BAH BAH BAH. GIVE ME CREDIT FOR MAKING FANTASY HOCKEY EVEN MORE CONVOLUTED PLEASE."

[Chris]

Fucking retarded. This whole this is retarded. 26 games -- 30 games to make a request -- is most especially retarded.

[Mike]

Shit guys, did we forget to check with Chris before deciding on this?

My bad Christopher. Huge oversight on our part.

[Lee]

cocksuckersayswhat

[Chris]

Shit guys, did we forget to check with Chris before deciding on this?

My bad Christopher. Huge oversight on our part.

Why on Earth do I have to make a bunch of requests just to get my players to have winger eligibility on a predetermined position out of training camp? My guess is that for a league that prides itself on it's complexity, the CC just makes it even worse.

[Chris]

This is hilarious. You guys have done a wonderful job mitigating the limitations of this stupid practice.

[Mike]

Shit guys, did we forget to check with Chris before deciding on this?

My bad Christopher. Huge oversight on our part.

Why on Earth do I have to make a bunch of requests just to get my players to have winger eligibility on a predetermined position out of training camp? My guess is that for a league that prides itself on it's complexity, the CC just makes it even worse.

enjoy

[Chris]

Shit guys, did we forget to check with Chris before deciding on this?

My bad Christopher. Huge oversight on our part.

Why on Earth do I have to make a bunch of requests just to get my players to have winger eligibility on a predetermined position out of training camp? My guess is that for a league that prides itself on it's complexity, the CC just makes it even worse.

enjoy

Don't tempt me.

[Chris]

So first, it's 26 games for a player, now it's 30 games for a team. All because it would be inconvenient for the CC. Go blow a goat.

[Scott]

Chris, I have Matt Read and Ryan Johansen both with 25gp before roster lock and both obviously wingers.. I feel your pain and half took it out on Mik last night.

[Shep]

It really should be 26-30gp for the player, not the team.

But, I am not getting into this argument again. I've learned to live with what has been decided.

[Nick]

Chris - you weren't here for the basis for this rule, but u have failed to raise one reasonable point to consider raising it.

This method is without subjectivity, was worked on for some time and took input from across the league - anyone that wanted to have an input was welcome to.

Please think before posting - this system for determining centers will determine an accurate c listing in a predictable manner. There will always be a few guys who are 'almost' wingers/centers - this method means its not Scott, or mikes, or Matt's opinion making it, rather the players play, over a stable period of gp.

If you'd like to talk about it reasonably on msn I'm always up for a chat. But lets not be short-sighted. 26gp is a very reasonable early review for players who were in question. Complete review at ASB of all players should be a very good picture for where a player will play the remainder of games - any change is tough to plan - good luck or bad - then in the off-season another complete review for planning the next seasons.

An accurate indication of who is playing C for BBkL purposes, that is unbiased, predictable, and reasonable effort to perform is what we've worked on.

[Chris]

Yes. Let's just make this rule so that the CC isn't inconvenienced by the fact that this rule punishes players who are versatile or at the mercy of a team's depth. In fact, let's just consider Eakin a centre based on his draft-year and not the years succeeding it when he played as a winger. Let's also assume that McMillan is a centre and not based on injuries last year and recently acquired depth the Anaheim Duck have employed so that McMillan can best utilize his skill-set as a torpedo-winger. Let's also assume that 26 games is considered a quarter pole, even though a quarter of 82 would be 20.5. Let's also assume that the All-Star break is effective as a determinant of all halves, seeing that most teams will have played 50-55 games, even though half of 82 is 41. Let's assume that the threshold for all quantification of the above is based on the arbitrary employment of a 30 game threshold by team, rather than player who could have been injured, demoted, promoted, or sat as a scratch. Let's also assume that versatility is an non-existent entity in hockey, even though this league promotes itself as being true to NHL-game play as possible. Let's assume all those things and pretend that the CC's solution is above reproach while the rest of us proletarians stick a thumb up our asses.

[Mike]

Tinfoil hat's fitting real nice there.