Comments for Positional Awareness: Forwards vs. C/LW/RW at http://hockey.dobbersports.com , comment 1 to 12 out of 12 comments http://hockey.dobbersports.com Sun, 19 May 2013 16:22:10 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17910 Great post. I think the a generic forward designation would level the fantasy playing field. It's great having the flexibility in the pool, but with mostly multi-positional forwards, I can't help but feel i've got an edge over my competition, being able to start more forwards when i have conflicts. Speaking of conflicts, I've been using the 'same night tool' to minimize schedule conflicts. It's a great tool, but it doesn't account for multiple positions. I can imagine this aspect would mean a much more complex spreadsheet, but does anyone know if such a thing exists? Yahoo head-to-head pool - jmart Wed, 23 Nov 2011 06:13:18 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17853 @Sam, that's true. I guess in real life it is the coach who decides what position guys are playing so the fantasy owner should have that same power. And unlike real life there would be no downside and a huge benefit to putting forwards at the defense position so you have to at least make the distinction between forward and defense. I wonder why the NHL doesn't have an official list of player's positions. Thinking it would be nice for all fantasy sites and stats providers to have a master list to use. Of course I'm sure the NHL would screw it up and have even more random positioning. - Draft Dodger Sun, 20 Nov 2011 16:45:46 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17848 This is fantasy hockey afterall and there is only so much realism you can inject. I actually think it is more unrealistic when a league designates C/RW/LW because you are relying on some outside force (ie. Yahoo) to determine which player plays which position and it seems so random and sometimes wrong. Having a stats provider affect your league so much just seems ridiculous to me and I don't quite "get it". Saying a forward is a forward is WAY more realistic in my opinion. - Sam Sun, 20 Nov 2011 11:53:55 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17843 Yes it would be so great to have the realistic flexibility a real team has, without the blanket 'forward' designation. NHL coaches have the flexibility but obviously it isn't absolute. Some players just don't perform away from their natural position. We're always looking at ways to come up with that balance in our pool. I was thinking maybe something where you can play a player out of position but he loses say 10% of his points. So then you're not forced to make a trade to deal with injuries but ideally you want to find a player who naturally plays that position. Would be a nightmare to administer I would think though. - Draft Dodger Sun, 20 Nov 2011 07:37:19 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17842 Great points everybody. Funny Mike, I know you were joking but I realized someone could turn my logic and use it as a rationale to eliminate defencemen as a requirement. That's where my sense of realism kicks back in - I'm a firm believer in having a realistic number of d-men. I guess at the end of the day, I just want the same flexibility that a real team has. If a real team has a LW go down, they don't automatically have to scramble to bring an LW up from the farm or grab one off the waiver wire. They have the option of shifting skaters to different positions, and every team uses this option at some point in every game. We make life more difficult on ourselves when we limit forwards to specific positions. Great feedback everybody, I love the conversation! - angelsofharlem (Glen) Sun, 20 Nov 2011 07:12:17 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17840 Great point, but you don't go far enough...if you just called them skaters I could fix my goalie problem in seconds...there only about 60 of them of vaule and having some flexibility would really make league settings meaningless...;D Dual designation can be limited by making the number of times a position can play fixed for the year. In one of my leagues I can only play 164 games in a position....after that their points don't count. Really limits the value of dueal eleigibility. - mike hess Sun, 20 Nov 2011 04:24:58 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17839 Hard to argue with any of your points Glen, except maybe #3. Injuries and players not playing up to expectations drive trading, if you can replace with any forward on your bench you're less likely to make a trade than if you have to replace a LW with a LW. We find it also makes for interesting trade negotiations - how much are you willing to overpay for the LW it is obvious you're in need of. One wrinkle we have in our pool - 14 team keeper - is we have 4 at each skater position but can have 3 or 5 as a result of a trade. In other words you have to replace a LW with LW if promoting from your bench but can swap a LW with a RW via trade. Have to say #4 is a very compelling reason to make the switch to your line of thinking. For keeper leagues it is frustrating trying to build a team when all your best players become RW during the off season. Great article Glen - Draft Dodger Sun, 20 Nov 2011 04:15:10 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17838 We've done exactly that in our new salary cap game, coded all wingers as W instead of RW or LW. Join our nonprofit game at hockey.swegamers.net, season starts on the 1st of December. - Bajen Belfast Sun, 20 Nov 2011 04:06:32 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17835 This is my first year as a Commissioner, and there are a couple people in the league who are relatively "fresh" when it comes to fantasy hockey; ultimately, I decided to go with Center and Wing distinctions, and it's worked out great for everyone involved. Looking around the league, it really helped newer players build a better overall roster, yet it still yields enough of an advantage to experienced [or lucky] poolies who drafted/acquired lots of players with dual C/W eligibility. - Dylan Sat, 19 Nov 2011 20:55:42 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17834 I agree Dobber, I'd rather go with C/W than C/LW/RW. - angelofharlem (Glen) Sat, 19 Nov 2011 19:32:06 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17833 yahoo has added a ton of positions, but from my personal observation they have handed out center elibability like candy and are slow to give out wing and D. I am not even sure if kane had even played a game at center before he got that eligability, but hodgson still is not a winger and liach will never get D - notoriousjim Sat, 19 Nov 2011 19:24:33 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/hoos/4128-positional-awareness-forwards-vs-clwrw#comment-17832 This is how I roll as well. Players play every position, I hate being corrected in columns about LW/RW. So pointless, because many players swap sides so often...and certainly if there is a need. And in fantasy, sometimes we need the RW to sometimes slide over to the LW. Another suggestion - have a C and a W. That's easy too. - Dobber Sat, 19 Nov 2011 19:22:47 +0100