[Yahoo] Players given additional positions

[ericdaoust]

Zubrus is only owned in leagues with insanely casual members.

"Shit, I remember this guy from like 1998..."

[horrorfan]

With so few additions in the last couple of months, a couple more relevant ones have appeared this week:

Feb 12: Leo Komarov Tor - C,LW,RW (Added RW)
Feb 9 Jakub Voracek Phi - LW,RW (Added LW)

[Leafs2010]

Yahoo is so annoying. Why add those so late in the season?

[The Comish]

Might as well just make them all Forwards (F) and forget about the C, LW, RW thing if they can't hire one f*ing guy to sort this out. I bet there are at least 500 guys (at least) on these forums who could do a better job of figuring who should qualify as C (umm, faceoffs would be one method...just sayin') and LW vs RW, well, I'd say a good number of NHL players get put on one wing and pretty much stay there the majority of the time. Of course, there are absolutely guys who can and do flip flop, but seriously Yahoo, it isn't rocket surgery. Seriously, I'd do it for free because once I set it up in the off-season, I'll only do position additions if the player looks like he's playing the majority of his time in a different position than what I originally gave him...or if he's truly playing multiple positions in most games. Ugh, amateurs.

[forumname]

Might as well just make them all Forwards (F) and forget about the C, LW, RW thing if they can't hire one f*ing guy to sort this out. I bet there are at least 500 guys (at least) on these forums who could do a better job of figuring who should qualify as C (umm, faceoffs would be one method...just sayin') and LW vs RW, well, I'd say a good number of NHL players get put on one wing and pretty much stay there the majority of the time. Of course, there are absolutely guys who can and do flip flop, but seriously Yahoo, it isn't rocket surgery. Seriously, I'd do it for free because once I set it up in the off-season, I'll only do position additions if the player looks like he's playing the majority of his time in a different position than what I originally gave him...or if he's truly playing multiple positions in most games. Ugh, amateurs.

It really wouldn't be that hard eh? Set up a system of rules, then follow it.

If player A plays more than 33% (or whatever) at position X over 10 consecutive games (or whatever), he gets that positional eligibility. If not, he loses it. The problem I think comes in taking eligibility away. They are scared to do it, and I can see why because people would be absolutely losing their minds. I'd be pissed off to the moon if they took it away now, but if they followed a coherent system, I think rational people would take the good with the bad and plan accordingly.

[The Comish]

It really wouldn't be that hard eh? Set up a system of rules, then follow it.

If player A plays more than 33% (or whatever) at position X over 10 consecutive games (or whatever), he gets that positional eligibility. If not, he loses it. The problem I think comes in taking eligibility away. They are scared to do it, and I can see why because people would be absolutely losing their minds. I'd be pissed off to the moon if they took it away now, but if they followed a coherent system, I think rational people would take the good with the bad and plan accordingly.

Why would I have to set up a system of rules for positional eligibility, Yahoo doesn't?

I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying. Once you set the players eligibility during the off-season, it stays all year (exactly as Yahoo does it) and he doesn't lose it that season. If however, I notice that he's playing more RW than C that I originally pegged him at, then at some point, I would consider giving him C/RW eligibility (never taking away C). It would be subjective, much in the same way that Yahoo appears to set their position eligibility.

[forumname]

Why would I have to set up a system of rules for positional eligibility, Yahoo doesn't?

I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying. Once you set the players eligibility during the off-season, it stays all year (exactly as Yahoo does it) and he doesn't lose it that season. If however, I notice that he's playing more RW than C that I originally pegged him at, then at some point, I would consider giving him C/RW eligibility (never taking away C). It would be subjective, much in the same way that Yahoo appears to set their position eligibility.

We definitely got our wires crossed. I was ranting about Yahoo, and how they should have a system...

[The Comish]

We definitely got our wires crossed. I was ranting about Yahoo, and how they should have a system...

Ah, got it! I remember back when I was running my baseball pools, once the player started (played?) 5 games at a different position, he gained eligibility at that position. I think it would be difficult to do in hockey because of the nature of the game - forwards sometimes change positions multiple times a period, let alone a game. I'd like to leave it as subjective, but at least put someone who understands the game and applies some common sense when giving out positions, especially before the season starts. Some guys who rarely, if ever take face-offs were/are given C eligibility. In many cases, the player isn't even projected to play down the middle, which clearly tells me that whoever is doing this is clearly not a big hockey guy OR doesn't give a f*ck.

[forumname]

This is how I picture the Positional Eligibility Room at the Yahoo Fantasy Hockey Headquarters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-79mMCkNbQ

[The Comish]

This is how I picture the Positional Eligibility Room at the Yahoo Fantasy Hockey Headquarters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-79mMCkNbQ

Haha, that's awesome!

But seriously, how do Burns and Byfuglien both start the season as RW/D when EVERYONE knew that they would both be D this season? Start the year at D and if they play enough (subjective) games up front (not just in front of the net on the PP), then give them RW (or whatever) eligibility. It's not that hard Yahoo. It's not like us fantasy guys expect perfection...I'm more than willing to accept that mistakes will be made, but there are far too many mistakes for most of us to take seriously.

[havanablast21]

Would it be that hard to give my recently acquired Stamkos RW? Making him a huge upgrade over the departed Perry long term? Sigh.

[butch]

how the hell do you use active/bench in the yahoo app ? (recently aquired an iphone)

when I clik on player it brings up his profile .

[Instant Karma]

how the hell do you use active/bench in the yahoo app ? (recently aquired an iphone)

when I clik on player it brings up his profile .

If you can move a player to/from the bench, there should be a pencil icon on the right-hand side of ea. player row. Click that and it will give you a list of slots that the player can be placed in.

[butch]

If you can move a player to/from the bench, there should be a pencil icon on the right-hand side of ea. player row. Click that and it will give you a list of slots that the player can be placed in.

I had used that with success a few times but then for some reason the player profile keeps coming up when messing around with it this morning

maybe I just need practice haha