Byfuglien

[Pengwin7]

Buff should open next year as RW-only in most leagues.
I think he'll open in Yahoo as RW/D... if it's the same 'ol Yahoo punks.

[jcairns]

Buff should open next year as RW-only in most leagues.
I think he'll open in Yahoo as RW/D... if it's the same 'ol Yahoo punks.

What's your take on the situation, by the way? It seems like an interesting discussion that we are all torn on. Personally, I don't get the lobbying efforts to get Yahoo to remove eligibilities for players. In one year leagues, if a forward goes in as RW/D (like Buff), it has zero impact on the league: He just gets drafted higher. Meanwhile, if you remove D-eligibility from a guy like Buff, you screw over all *CURRENT* owners in keeper leagues who drafted him early as a top defenseman (or traded for him). Sure, there is a benefit to owners of a D-man moving forward, but the impact of removing D-eligibility is pretty huge and unfair imho.

[chuckcouples]

But the default rule, to me, is that once a Dman has obvously been moved to Fwd, you can no longer allow his owne rto play him as a Dman, even in keeper leagues. You can deal with the perceived unfairness of that by reassessing each year, and so that the eligibility change is not permanent.

Do you feel the same way about centers playing wing and wingers playing center? This has a large impact on any league that uses face offs as a category. This would be a logistical nightmare for the stats providers. Is Byfuglien a forward because he lines up for his regular 5 on 5 shift as a winger? Is he a dman because he spends 5 minutes per game playing the point on power plays as well as during 4 on 4 shifts?

[Gramps]

Hoping Byfuglien keeps his d eligibility in Fantrax...

[Carcillo]

Buff should be LW/RW next season and lose his D-eligibility in all leagues. But more likely he will get to keep it.

Though I don't think in Buff's situation it really matters. Usually forwards who have D-eligibility in fantasy hockey are more valuable because of it but I think Buff is a player who is more productive playing as a D-man than as a forward so him playing forward while keeping his D-man status in fantasy hockey doesn't make him any more valuable. If I was a Buff owner I'd want him to actually play as a D-man instead of just having that positional eligibility in fantasy hockey. So for me he's a sell high candidate right now with him moving to play forward for Jets.

[vitun-tyhmä]

Buff should be LW/RW next season and lose his D-eligibility in all leagues. But more likely he will get to keep it.

Though I don't think in Buff's situation it really matters. Usually forwards who have D-eligibility in fantasy hockey are more valuable because of it but I think Buff is a player who is more productive playing as a D-man than as a forward so him playing forward while keeping his D-man status in fantasy hockey doesn't make him any more valuable. If I was a Buff owner I'd want him to actually play as a D-man instead of just having that positional eligibility in fantasy hockey. So for me he's a sell high candidate right now with him moving to play forward for Jets.

You would be mostly wrong!
http://www.jetsstatsguy.com/dustin-b...vs-defenseman/

[Carcillo]

You would be mostly wrong!
http://www.jetsstatsguy.com/dustin-b...vs-defenseman/

How's so? Buff as a D-man had better PPG and more SOG/game. And for OP's league, points is the only thing that counts.

Per 60 min stats here aren't important as no fantasy league probably counts stats that way. The fact is Buff plays significantly more minutes as a D-man than as a forward, meanining he has a lot more changes to put up more stats as well.

[horrorfan]

You would be mostly wrong!
http://www.jetsstatsguy.com/dustin-b...vs-defenseman/

I'm curious, why should we look at it per 60 minutes? As a forward, he gets less minutes, so shouldn't we use these figures as real values for comparison? By comparing the positions per 60 minute games, that is trying to 'even' out the ice time when the ice time is not even. I would think using production/actual game played would be more important than production/60 minute game.

[ross10019]

I'm curious, why should we look at it per 60 minutes? As a forward, he gets less minutes, so shouldn't we use these figures as real values for comparison? By comparing the positions per 60 minute games, that is trying to 'even' out the ice time when the ice time is not even. I would think using production/actual game played would be more important than production/60 minute game.

That's what it is, production per 60 mins of ICE TIME, not per 60 min game.

Buff is indeed the only dman I've ever seen whose point production declines when used at fwd - a testament to what an offensive beast he is as a dman.

[vitun-tyhmä]

How's so? Buff as a D-man had better PPG and more SOG/game. And for OP's league, points is the only thing that counts.

Per 60 min stats here aren't important as no fantasy league probably counts stats that way. The fact is Buff plays significantly more minutes as a D-man than as a forward, meanining he has a lot more changes to put up more stats as well.

Per 60 mins shows his efficiency of production that's why it is important to look at. Either way though it is a small sample size so you can't extrapolate too much from it. I thought it was interesting though in that it was from the same season

[horrorfan]

But would efficiency really matter? You have some efficient players who play 10/12 minutes a game but unless their ice time increases then their value is lower regardless.

If his ice time as a D vs as a F remain the same and those are the rates we are looking at, then he is more productive as a defenceman (based on that sample). If his ice time as a forward increases past 19 minutes, then that could change. I just don't see how looking at it per 60 minutes played being that relevant.

Of course it's a small sample, his usage could change, his ice time could change, etc.

[horrorfan]

That's what it is, production per 60 mins of ICE TIME, not per 60 min game.

Buff is indeed the only dman I've ever seen whose point production declines when used at fwd - a testament to what an offensive beast he is as a dman.

That's what I meant, didn't word it properly. Thanks.

[vitun-tyhmä]

But would efficiency really matter? You have some efficient players who play 10/12 minutes a game but unless their ice time increases then their value is lower regardless.

If his ice time as a D vs as a F remain the same and those are the rates we are looking at, then he is more productive as a defenceman (based on that sample). If his ice time as a forward increases past 19 minutes, then that could change. I just don't see how looking at it per 60 minutes played being that relevant.

Of course it's a small sample, his usage could change, his ice time could change, etc.

Like I said it is a small sample so I wouldn't read too much into it, I thought it was interesting that when factoring in TOI that the numbers worked out that way.

[petegreg21]

I think points per 60 minutes is really only more valuable in real life for a coach to say "well look, if we move him here and play him less minutes he's more efficient for us"

In fantasy hockey, I dont care how many minutes a guy is playing, I want a guy who's going to give me the most points in my weekly match up.

I don't really know where I'm going with anymore other than I agree with Carcillo that Buff is more productive as a D man for points only.

[ross10019]

I think the 60 min measure can be valuable in fantasy too - for a player ( esp a young guy) getting low TOI and yet producing good numbers, it's a sign that they might get more TOI soon or shows you what their production will look like with high end TOI