A positional proposition to the CC to please consider.

[anton]

Oh BBKL's on its rag again

this analogy makes me lol everytime. it's so true.

[MSP4LYFE]

Because unless clearly outlined the appeal process will be abused and this whole thing to waste.

Why didn't you voice any of these concerns while the CC was discussing and asking for opinions? I know you noted that Marleau and Joki were iffy on the top 4 list, however the other criteria we've worked to come up with supports Marleau as a C and Joki as a W

-> so moving foward is it a good idea that an amendment to the positional listing can be made if the player in question meets a) Top 4 FOT however has b) FOT < 450 & c) FOR <.3 ?

It's weird how much I agree with you on Kyuss on this...

[Chuck Norris]

Yeah this isnt a discussion to be honest. Somehow Jussi Jokinen is listed as a winger and instead of saying yes that can be reevaluated, you have just said tough luck.

not true.. and a disappointing post overall. Looks like i have waisted all day.

Things will be revaluated if it will be considered a worth improvement overall.

The case of Iginla is more convincing than Jokinen's one, because he has a lower FOR and he clearly won't be over .3 next season, whereas for Jussi, by the likes of Canes lineup, it's anyone's guess.
Another convincing argument would be if these criteria would indeed bring too many centers.

still waiting for your population btw.

I can shed some light on Jokinen because I owned him most of last year until I sent hi mto Shiv. Jokinen started the first month or two at center for the Canes, where most of his FOW came from. Then they shifted him to wing and only took occasional draws. He's a grey area cause they suited him up at both center and wing for extended periods of time.

[kyuss]

Yeah this isnt a discussion to be honest. Somehow Jussi Jokinen is listed as a winger and instead of saying yes that can be reevaluated, you have just said tough luck.

not true.. and a disappointing post overall. Looks like i have waisted all day.

Things will be revaluated if it will be considered a worth improvement overall.

The case of Iginla is more convincing than Jokinen's one, because he has a lower FOR and he clearly won't be over .3 next season, whereas for Jussi, by the likes of Canes lineup, it's anyone's guess.
Another convincing argument would be if these criteria would indeed bring too many centers.

still waiting for your population btw.

I can shed some light on Jokinen because I owned him most of last year until I sent hi mto Shiv. Jokinen started the first month or two at center for the Canes, where most of his FOW came from. Then they shifted him to wing and only took occasional draws. He's a grey area cause they suited him up at both center and wing for extended periods of time.

which shows how having him at C for a few months wouldn't be that absurd nor mean that the whole system is flawed.
Anyway, we are discussing some adjusting, we will see the result.

[Shep]

I think maybe reevaluate every 1/4 of the season? After 20, 41, 61 games?

Or even at like 30 and all star break?

[Nick]

The issue with 30 games is just some weird stuff coaches try to start the year. We want a big enough sample that it matters.


However - we need to chill on the topic for a bit - the issues/concerns/ideas have been raised, time to think and stop polarizing.

[Nick]

Too much re-evaluation causes some unnecessary movement - we want GM's to be able to predict the changes coming and no pressure forced trades.


Lots of time right now - and then you follow your guys and can plan for any position changes coming.

[Shep]

Oh I'm done. Just saw it mentioned.