Buds Board Keepers League

MSP4LYFE wroteCOLON

mr. bruin wroteCOLONWell I fucking hope Zetterberg gets LW because i wouldn't have traded Marleau for him especially knowing he was RW with Thornton. This roster limitation stuff this close to season start is ridiculous. TSN was basically chosen because it was liberal and was as close to leaving things alone as we could get. If things are changing people will need extra time to become compliant with there rosters because something like this would basically drop players values when you know you are dealing with a team with an illegal roster. Too damn close to season start imo. Why wasn't this issue brought up in JUNE? Imposing changes that will directly effect a teams players or players they have specifically traded for this late in the year is not good at all.

This issue has been brought up long before June Kyle, so please don't use that as an excuse, secondly TSN.ca was not the liberal choice, as evidenced by above it was the furthest thing from it, if the goal was to keep things status quo, then why was this issue brought up in the first place...?

I am sympathetic to the concerns of those who paid X amount to obtain position eligibility, which is why I also feel a flexible deadline should be granted to those with players who need to be moved due to the site change (less than a handful). It isn't hard to comply with, and the pros far outweigh the cons, and as demonstrated by my trade of Richard Park, and Shiv's trade of Vincent Lecavalier it is evident that player values do not drop as you seem to be suggesting.

I get you don't want to lose eligibility on certain players Kyle, to be completely honest I would do the same thing in your shoes, but I never subscribed to the be honest and play fair theory...

Well, if it was brought up in June why was nothing ever done? Position eligibility is such a variable thing and can change game to game. I do not disagree with most of the statements made in this thread or even Nicks idea about FOT.

What i do disagree with is changes this late that directly affect teams that have set rosters. Not everyone can pimp and bitch players around he league like some of you nor should they be forced to based on a change this late. Some things just need to be taken care of in the summer months not 2 weeks before the season starts. Especially in a league like this with such detail and salary cap concerns. This is like saying oh we are removing FOW as a stat category now. Just couldn't be done. Removing dual eligibility or keeping it or having a better source is a great idea...for the offseason in 2011.

^

Kyle this issue affects only a handful of players, and even less will be forced to make a move (assuming this rule is passed). It's not as big of an issue as you are making it out to be, the issue is that a select few people don't want to lose a winger that gets FOW, that is a a valuable commodity, and I get that, I was there with Richard Park, but it simply isn't fair to everyone...

Furthermore, I am fully supporting a flexible period (2-3 weeks from the start of the season) for GM's to correct their position eligbility, and like I mentioned above, this only applies to a handful of players.

As for your initial question, the answer is simple, a few GM's with a say in the CC (namely myself) didn't want to lose out on wingers who got FOW. Especially when their appeared to be no objective ruling in sight, merely subjective position changes.

Finally, I do not believe waiting until 2011 is an option, frankly the loopholes that currently exist pose greater threats to the integrity and level playing field of this league, than the handful of changes that would need to be made if we were to change it now.

Kareem i totally respect your work here on the numbers and do not doubt you are on to something but this whole issue is still fishy imo. There isn't really a clear cut answer or source. Brandon Dubinsky did play both RW and C last season. What about a guy like Comrie who is listed as a LW on sportsnet which is fine as he only won 25 faceoffs last year but it is known that without Staal for possibly awhile he ill most likely be a center. Does he lose his LW for say 1 month then we change it again? It is too variable and changes so much. There are truly dual eligible players in the league and defining those players could be the real chore. Yes we have obvious mistakes where a guy may be listed as wing as has a bunch of FOW or center with none. Or a player may have been shifted from his normal position for injury reasons. It is too variable. I do not disagree with you at all..I disagree with the timing. That is my only problem. TSN has dual eligibility and is liberal. It is one source. It was a compromise for this close to season start.

mr. bruin wroteCOLONKareem i totally respect your work here on the numbers and do not doubt you are on to something but this whole issue is still fishy imo. There isn't really a clear cut answer or source. Brandon Dubinsky did play both RW and C last season. What about a guy like Comrie who is listed as a LW on sportsnet which is fine as he only won 25 faceoffs last year but it is known that without Staal for possibly awhile he ill most likely be a center. Does he lose his LW for say 1 month then we change it again? It is too variable and changes so much. There are truly dual eligible players in the league and defining those players could be the real chore. Yes we have obvious mistakes where a guy may be listed as wing as has a bunch of FOW or center with none. Or a player may have been shifted from his normal position for injury reasons. It is too variable. I do not disagree with you at all..I disagree with the timing. That is my only problem. TSN has dual eligibility and is liberal. It is one source. It was a compromise for this close to season start.

I just don't see TSN as a viable option or compromise at all, it makes things worse. At the same time I see what you are saying and sympathize with you, so here is a thought...

Perhaps we place SPNET as a primary source, and then build a three man commiree (preferably to those with center ice) whose sole responsibility would be to oversee position eligibility under extreme circumstances. For instance, if Henrik Zetterberg and Mike Comrie were listed as LW and RW, you bring your concern to the committee they watch the games and determine whether or not X player is indeed deserving of dual eligibility, or if it were before the season, they would examine and research multiple lineups/pre season games/coaches comments etc. but again this would only be under extreme or obvious cases. I'd be more than willing to head such a group, and would be able to finalize any decision in minimal time.

You know what i would actually like to do is do some tracking and shift chart making and get an accuracy and update frequency for our own comparison. There are some great sites out there where lines are updated every game. Say the first week or two we do some comparison to these players and then compare to sportsnet. Basically like a case study.

If we are going to be his detailed we need to put in some due diligence. And i would not say it is just a handful. We cannot just look at the stars. We need to do the same thing for all players , even those ones that may be up or down from the minors. What about a guy like Seguin? If Savard is out, Seguin could play center if hes not Seguin will be on the wing, does he lose center eligibility under assumption or are we going to have some proof? There is a lot more to this than just a handful of players. I am considering the broader scope and trying to do the right thing when expressing my opinion. I know some may disagree as I have dual eligible player on my roster but I am trying to express opinion as if i didn't. CC comes first and so does the league. My own issues come third. I know you also have the league at heart as well so i do not know what we can do to be successful here.

mr. bruin wroteCOLONYou know what i would actually like to do is do some tracking and shift chart making and get an accuracy and update frequency for our own comparison. There are some great sites out there where lines are updated every game. Say the first week or two we do some comparison to these players and then compare to sportsnet. Basically like a case study.

If we are going to be his detailed we need to put in some due diligence. And i would not say it is just a handful. We cannot just look at the stars. We need to do the same thing for all players , even those ones that may be up or down from the minors. What about a guy like Seguin? If Savard is out, Seguin could play center if hes not Seguin will be on the wing, does he lose center eligibility under assumption or are we going to have some proof? There is a lot more to this than just a handful of players. I am considering the broader scope and trying to do the right thing when expressing my opinion. I know some may disagree as I have dual eligible player on my roster but I am trying to express opinion as if i didn't. CC comes first and so does the league. My own issues come third. I know you also have the league at heart as well so i do not know what we can do to be successful here.

I'd be open to a case study, but of course it would take several months, if not a full season to complete a detailed case study, and by that time the results will already be out of date, and thus useless.

When examining different positions, I based my findings, not on star players, but rather players with top FOW stats, and who were top 4 in FOA (face off attempts) among their team. Essentially these are the only players that matter, a center who really plays wing, or a winger who plays center but takes minimal draws offers little to no advantage in our H2H format, but a winger who draws significant FOW does, and therein lies the issue here.

Here is my idea.

We say we are going to use sportsnet as our primary source. GMs have till week 7 to comply. There will be a committee that is formed whose job it is to watch games, and deal with issues of player eligibility. GMS have from week 1-4 to submit players they think are listed incorrectly, or should have other eligibility. Week 5 the committee says all final decisions (it can do rolling decisions as well). But form this point out they have at least 2 weeks to make the changes to their roster.

Till week 7 however we use CBS default rankings. To all of you who claim this is a huge issue with league integrity, the playoffs is the main issue. This gives everyone a lot of time to adjust.

The committee will list sportsnet changes to players and then any other additions as it goes over those 5 weeks. So people know the changes forth coming.

For the record I think this whole issue is overblown, and silly to address now if everyone had issues with it all summer. We wouldn't be discussing changes to any categories at this time for instance.

inferno31 wroteCOLONHere is my idea.

We say we are going to use sportsnet as our primary source. GMs have till week 7 to comply. There will be a committee that is formed whose job it is to watch games, and deal with issues of player eligibility. GMS have from week 1-4 to submit players they think are listed incorrectly, or should have other eligibility. Week 5 the committee says all final decisions (it can do rolling decisions as well). But form this point out they have at least 2 weeks to make the changes to their roster.

Till week 7 however we use CBS default rankings. To all of you who claim this is a huge issue with league integrity, the playoffs is the main issue. This gives everyone a lot of time to adjust.

The committee will list sportsnet changes to players and then any other additions as it goes over those 5 weeks. So people know the changes forth coming.

For the record I think this whole issue is overblown, and silly to address now if everyone had issues with it all summer. We wouldn't be discussing changes to any categories at this time for instance.

I for one tried to adress it earlier in the year but no one would have any of it. I like this overal idea but feel 7 weeks is way to generous however, the most anyone will have to make is one maybe two changes and I dont think 7 weeks is the amount of time it would take to adjust

inferno31 wroteCOLONHere is my idea.

We say we are going to use sportsnet as our primary source. GMs have till week 7 to comply. There will be a committee that is formed whose job it is to watch games, and deal with issues of player eligibility. GMS have from week 1-4 to submit players they think are listed incorrectly, or should have other eligibility. Week 5 the committee says all final decisions (it can do rolling decisions as well). But form this point out they have at least 2 weeks to make the changes to their roster.

Till week 7 however we use CBS default rankings. To all of you who claim this is a huge issue with league integrity, the playoffs is the main issue. This gives everyone a lot of time to adjust.

The committee will list sportsnet changes to players and then any other additions as it goes over those 5 weeks. So people know the changes forth coming.

For the record I think this whole issue is overblown, and silly to address now if everyone had issues with it all summer. We wouldn't be discussing changes to any categories at this time for instance.

i think this suggestion is very fair:

1. Use Sportsnet from now on.
2. Give till Week 5 to look over conflicts suggested by GMs
3. After that we hand out decisions which must let rosters be fixed by week 7.
4. From week 7 onwards, Sportsnet is the bible.

inferno31 wroteCOLONHere is my idea.

We say we are going to use sportsnet as our primary source. GMs have till week 7 to comply. There will be a committee that is formed whose job it is to watch games, and deal with issues of player eligibility. GMS have from week 1-4 to submit players they think are listed incorrectly, or should have other eligibility. Week 5 the committee says all final decisions (it can do rolling decisions as well). But form this point out they have at least 2 weeks to make the changes to their roster.

Till week 7 however we use CBS default rankings. To all of you who claim this is a huge issue with league integrity, the playoffs is the main issue. This gives everyone a lot of time to adjust.

The committee will list sportsnet changes to players and then any other additions as it goes over those 5 weeks. So people know the changes forth coming.

For the record I think this whole issue is overblown, and silly to address now if everyone had issues with it all summer. We wouldn't be discussing changes to any categories at this time for instance.

That's more than fair, I would be content with this.

bryshook wroteCOLONI for one tried to adress it earlier in the year but no one would have any of it. I like this overal idea but feel 7 weeks is way to generous however, the most anyone will have to make is one maybe two changes and I dont think 7 weeks is the amount of time it would take to adjust

Perhaps not, but we need to be sympathetic of those who need to make such changes, in order for a compromise to work you need to give and take, this issue weeds out the main problem with more than enough time for the playoffs which is the main concern.

MSP4LYFE wroteCOLON

bryshook wroteCOLONI for one tried to adress it earlier in the year but no one would have any of it. I like this overal idea but feel 7 weeks is way to generous however, the most anyone will have to make is one maybe two changes and I dont think 7 weeks is the amount of time it would take to adjust

Perhaps not, but we need to be sympathetic of those who need to make such changes, in order for a compromise to work you need to give and take, this issue weeds out the main problem with more than enough time for the playoffs which is the main concern.

I am fine with it and would have no problems if that is what is decided. If 7 weeks is voted on and cleared im fine with it, I just personally feel it is a little too generous. I am only one opinion.

Well I am on the opposite end of the spectrum. I specifically made the trade for Zetterberg for his wing eligibility. If that is being revoked this close to season start than i would just like to have Marleau back and the trade revoked. That is just as fair of a request if position eligibility for certain players has become an issue this close to roster time. It sounds extreme but it is that important to some people.

Anything to do with scoring, cap, positions, format etc cannot be changed in a fantasy league when we are under a cap system and 2 weeks away from puck drop. I totally get your guys opinions and am not disagreeing at all. I am just expressing my concerns with the timing.

Under this rule I will be forced to go through a certain period of time with my hands tied waiting to see what position player x will be and then it may be decided that i have to change it and it stays for the year even though it may change a week later after the decision and may or may not be updated on sportsnet. Therefore forcing me into a trade that i never intended to do and having it known to the league that I am in this position. And using the top 4 players from each team is a yearly evaluation based on last season stats. If i knew this at the time I would consider Zetterberg a center by the 500 Faceoffs won. Therefore i would never have traded for him as i knew we had already adjusted the max center positions to 5. We cannot just go as a mob mentality and impose this rule without taking each and every individuals concerns to the table and the timing of this decision as it effects more than a few players. Im just not to comfortable imposing this at this time. June or July or even August fine...would have been nice right around the time we changed the positions. But now? too late.

mr. bruin wroteCOLONWell I am on the opposite end of the spectrum. I specifically made the trade for Zetterberg for his wing eligibility. If that is being revoked this close to season start than i would just like to have Marleau back and the trade revoked. That is just as fair of a request if position eligibility for certain players has become an issue this close to roster time. It sounds extreme but it is that important to some people.

Anything to do with scoring, cap, positions, format etc cannot be changed in a fantasy league when we are under a cap system and 2 weeks away from puck drop. I totally get your guys opinions and am not disagreeing at all. I am just expressing my concerns with the timing.

Under this rule I will be forced to go through a certain period of time with my hands tied waiting to see what position player x will be and then it may be decided that i have to change it and it stays for the year even though it may change a week later after the decision and may or may not be updated on sportsnet. Therefore forcing me into a trade that i never intended to do and having it known to the league that I am in this position. And using the top 4 players from each team is a yearly evaluation based on last season stats. If i knew this at the time I would consider Zetterberg a center by the 500 Faceoffs won. Therefore i would never have traded for him as i knew we had already adjusted the max center positions to 5. We cannot just go as a mob mentality and impose this rule without taking each and every individuals concerns to the table and the timing of this decision as it effects more than a few players. Im just not to comfortable imposing this at this time. June or July or even August fine...would have been nice right around the time we changed the positions. But now? too late.

I'd rather see this not dealt with now but some members of our league think its an imminent issue. I think its silly to think of addressing this issue this close to roster deadline. If it was a big issue it should of been brought up earlier, I know some members did try to. But the fact is its a poor time to try and go making wide spread changes across the league. Its silly, thats why I proposed 7 weeks, to give time but even still had this been a discussion to include points, reduce a category change roster requirements everyone would be jumping saying how idiotic it is to change it now so close to our season opener.

mr. bruin wroteCOLONWell I am on the opposite end of the spectrum. I specifically made the trade for Zetterberg for his wing eligibility. If that is being revoked this close to season start than i would just like to have Marleau back and the trade revoked. That is just as fair of a request if position eligibility for certain players has become an issue this close to roster time. It sounds extreme but it is that important to some people.

Anything to do with scoring, cap, positions, format etc cannot be changed in a fantasy league when we are under a cap system and 2 weeks away from puck drop. I totally get your guys opinions and am not disagreeing at all. I am just expressing my concerns with the timing.

Under this rule I will be forced to go through a certain period of time with my hands tied waiting to see what position player x will be and then it may be decided that i have to change it and it stays for the year even though it may change a week later after the decision and may or may not be updated on sportsnet. Therefore forcing me into a trade that i never intended to do and having it known to the league that I am in this position. And using the top 4 players from each team is a yearly evaluation based on last season stats. If i knew this at the time I would consider Zetterberg a center by the 500 Faceoffs won. Therefore i would never have traded for him as i knew we had already adjusted the max center positions to 5. We cannot just go as a mob mentality and impose this rule without taking each and every individuals concerns to the table and the timing of this decision as it effects more than a few players. Im just not to comfortable imposing this at this time. June or July or even August fine...would have been nice right around the time we changed the positions. But now? too late.

You're fine, I guarantee Zetterberg will be determined dual eligible at the very least...

inferno31 wroteCOLONI'd rather see this not dealt with now but some members of our league think its an imminent issue. I think its silly to think of addressing this issue this close to roster deadline. If it was a big issue it should of been brought up earlier, I know some members did try to. But the fact is its a poor time to try and go making wide spread changes across the league. Its silly, thats why I proposed 7 weeks, to give time but even still had this been a discussion to include points, reduce a category change roster requirements everyone would be jumping saying how idiotic it is to change it now so close to our season opener.

To compare this to our scoring system is idiotic, one effects every player in the game, the other effects a handful of players. One is impossible to adjust to in time, the other is more then possible to adjust to in time, in fact we are giving ample time, seven weeks to be exact...

Your proposal is more than just, and takes the concerns of each individual into account. The only reason this wasn't dealt with earlier is because the big name GM's (myself included) didn't want it to be dealt with, you know this as well as I.

If (for example) Henrik Zetterberg is truly a winger/dual eligible player, as I assume Kyle believes (otherwise he intentionally acquired a center to trump the system, an act he himself speaks out against) then there should be no issues in granting Zetterberg dual eligibility via comittee. The same reasoning can be applied to all other cases, the only exceptions are those who knowingly tried to thwart the system, such managers should be forced to make changes. I myself was, and so to was Shiv, and we both managed to do so with relative ease.

MSP4LYFE wroteCOLON

inferno31 wroteCOLONI'd rather see this not dealt with now but some members of our league think its an imminent issue. I think its silly to think of addressing this issue this close to roster deadline. If it was a big issue it should of been brought up earlier, I know some members did try to. But the fact is its a poor time to try and go making wide spread changes across the league. Its silly, thats why I proposed 7 weeks, to give time but even still had this been a discussion to include points, reduce a category change roster requirements everyone would be jumping saying how idiotic it is to change it now so close to our season opener.

To compare this to our scoring system is idiotic, one effects every player in the game, the other effects a handful of players. One is impossible to adjust to in time, the other is 7 weeks...

Your proposal is more than just, and takes the concerns of each individual into account. The only reason this wasn't dealt with earlier is because the big name GM's (myself included) didn't want it to be dealt with, you know this as well as I.

If (for example) Henrik Zetterberg is truly a winger/dual eligible player, as I assume Kyle believes (otherwise he intentionally acquired a center to trump the system, an act he himself speaks out against) then there should be no issues in granting Zetterberg dual eligibility via comittee. The same reasoning can be applied to all other cases, the only exceptions are those who knowingly tried to thwart the system, such managers should be forced to make changes.

Couldnt have said it better myself bud.

MSP4LYFE wroteCOLONI was looking over TSN.CA, and comparing it to the FOW stat, as well as draws taken stat, and it became immediately evident that TSN is the worst of all options available.

TSN is actually the best available option:
it's the most reliable source for N.A. hockey as much as eliteprospect is for European hockey (probably overall when it comes to positions and stats).
The fact TSN awards dual eligibility more often than other sites just fits well with the bad (LATE) timing we are addressing this matter.

Whenever there is a position in question TSN almost always gives X player dual eligibility (zetterberg, backes. oshie, park, ott, flash, laich etc), and in certain cases it is just absurd (I.E. Brandon Dubinsky and Chris Drury being listed as C/LW)...

the guys in the first bracket all deserve dual eligibility.
Dury is only a LW on CBS (which shows CBS sucks), and also has dual eligibility on eliteprospects...
Fact is, it's much better to have one player generously given dual eligibility than to have one (actually many!) players wrongly taken away of a deserved position, especially in the situation we are in.
(Besides, as far as we know, Dubisnky could go back to only C on TSN as well in the near future, if due. If you take the updating occurrence into consideration for Zett on sportsnet, i guess we should do the same for Dubinsky on TSN).

I completed this comparative analysis on multiple sites (ESPN, SPNET, TSN, NHL, YAHOO etc.) and BY FAR the most consistent site (scary consistent really) was sportsnet.ca, they appear to be on the ball with regards to position eligibility. Most of the top faceoff specialists on the wing were listed in their correct positions...Center, and vice versa with legit wingers.

A few examples are listed below:

Henrik Zetterberg, C
Dave Steckel, C
Richard Park, C
Steve Ott, C
TJ Oshie, C
David Backes, C/W
Tomas Fleischmann, W
Brooks Laich, W
Craig Adams, W
Brandon Dubinsky, C
Chris Drury, C
Patrick Marleau, W
Claude Giroux, W

even the players you chose to prove your point actually suggest sportsnet would be a bad source for us (not a bad source overall speaking, but a bad source for our purposes); do they even award dual eligibility to anyone?

Backes is only listed as a W on sportsnet, unlike what you reported:
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/players/David_Backes# ->wrong
Marleau as well -> wrong
Adams as well -> wrong
same obvious mistake goes for Laich, Oshie, Ott, Adams..
and even more importantly for Zetterberg: it's a bad thing being robbed of legit C eligibility, it's much worse being robbed of legit W eligibility.

We can NOT use all of a sudden (not even with a warning of weeks) a source that doesn't award the W position to a guy like Zett .

And no matter what you say, there is no guarantee he will get the W position assigned later on.

TSN is the simpler and fairer solution available at this time.
Using sportsnet, a committee and a warning period would be better than only using sportsnet, but still would complicate things, make them less fair, and bring back subjectivity (-> controversy) into the process.

7 weeks = way to generous iMO... we can begin judging lines on tuesday.

We don't have control over injuries, salaries, or positions (or their production)... because you planned someone to play wing is not related to wether he does or not.

Similar to what Shiv & Kyle suggested:

1.Start with sports net positions
2. Starting now GM's can request that discrepancies/issues be checked into
3. During pre-season these issues are examined, if any of them have merit, a change period is granted then
4. Kyle's process kicks in, but the review is 3 weeks, with 2 weeks to adjust to any changes (5 weeks no 7 week total).
5. This can be done at any point in time, if a player is mis-positioned, its as simple as submitting his name, check is done, and the adjustment period kicks in.

7 weeks is simply allowing for extremely competitive GM's to benefit from it for 1/3 the season... first prove that your (not naming ANYONE here) not just being a selfish a selfish fuck, if Zetty lines up for pre-season at wing then you have full merit, now if he's #1 in FOA and centring the 2nd unit there's no merit to that claim.

Honestly having 1-2 players who we need to be more liberal with ( as a group me can make an honest decision) is better then having 15-20 that are stupidly dual eligible.

Bitching about position change is no different then complaining about injuries, unplanned salary changes, or unexpected TOI changes, we're harsh and realistic on all the others, leaving this loop-hole open is silly.

facey wroteCOLON Similar to what Shiv & Kyle suggested:

1.Start with sports net positions.

unfair.

Honestly having 1-2 players who we need to be more liberal with ( as a group me can make an honest decision) is better then having 15-20 that are stupidly dual eligible.

when using TSN instead of sportsnet, it looks like it would be the opposite:
1-2 players with undeserved dual eligibility instead of 15-20 who are stupidly restricted.

Bitching about position change is no different then complaining about injuries, unplanned salary changes, or unexpected TOI changes.

honestly, i can't se how you can compare those things.
Injuries, salary changes and TPI changes are all part of the game, being robbed of a positiong eligibility few weeks before the start of the season should not.