Buds Board Keepers League

hong57 wroteCOLONok was just to confirm it won't take into account the new contracts that takes place now

?

just putting this here so i dont forget:

early update:

brandon mcmillan (0.35 FOR last season)
patrick marleau (0.32 FOR last season)
patrick sharp (0.35 FOR last season)

Hey guy's I just need to know if the following are Center or winger

1st.Trevor Lewis- 39.2 FO%-151 FOW and was 4th on the roster
2nd.Jochen Hecht- 43.1 FO%-3rd on roster for FOW with 314FOW-
3rd.Darryl Boyce - 46.4 FO%-212 FOW and 4th on Toronto and is listed as a winger


Just wondering who's available for become a center and who's a winger.

fedro91 wroteCOLONHey guy's I just need to know if the following are Center or winger

1st.Trevor Lewis- 39.2 FO%-151 FOW and was 4th on the roster
2nd.Jochen Hecht- 43.1 FO%-3rd on roster for FOW with 314FOW-
3rd.Darryl Boyce - 46.4 FO%-212 FOW and 4th on Toronto and is listed as a winger


Just wondering who's available for become a center and who's a winger.

Why don't you do your own homework?

fedro91 wroteCOLONHey guy's I just need to know if the following are Center or winger

1st.Trevor Lewis- 39.2 FO%-151 FOW and was 4th on the roster
2nd.Jochen Hecht- 43.1 FO%-3rd on roster for FOW with 314FOW-
3rd.Darryl Boyce - 46.4 FO%-212 FOW and 4th on Toronto and is listed as a winger


Just wondering who's available for become a center and who's a winger.

Frank do your own work...Jesus. That said it should be common sense, if they were all top 4 on their respective team they are centers...

MSP4LYFE wroteCOLON

fedro91 wroteCOLONHey guy's I just need to know if the following are Center or winger

1st.Trevor Lewis- 39.2 FO%-151 FOW and was 4th on the roster
2nd.Jochen Hecht- 43.1 FO%-3rd on roster for FOW with 314FOW-
3rd.Darryl Boyce - 46.4 FO%-212 FOW and 4th on Toronto and is listed as a winger


Just wondering who's available for become a center and who's a winger.

Frank do your own work...Jesus. That said it should be common sense, if they were all top 4 on their respective team they are centers...

I know I was only here to make sure. Ain't that our job as gm to post to make sure. Then When I do I get yell at. Fuck off. This thread is to make sure and I even check out the % , where they stand on there roster so I made my homework. I never once posted in here but I read alot off the pages. Also I know you guy's said if they are top 4 then they are center but either way I rather make sure then not. So just confirm it jesus.

There is a thread that has the entire list...

http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=3669

So for rookies I have to wait until Game 26 to get their status changed to W?
lame.

NHL.com, and most other listings, list Matt Read as a RW
http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=84 ... l-keymatch

yes.

Our official site is their draft position, and if not that, then the position cbs gives them.

I think Moss should have winger eligibility

Nick wroteCOLONyes.

Our official site is their draft position, and if not that, then the position cbs gives them.

oh cbs such a flawed system.

RW http://forecaster.ca/hockeynews/hockey/player.cgi?7049
RW http://www2.tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?id=7049
RW http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/players/Matt_Read
RW http://flyers.nhl.com/club/player.htm?id=8476177

Im all for this system but for undrafted players it should be the proofs approach of last season...

Billy dude, choosing those sites is majorly flawed, Totally subjective which to chose.

I.e. Hockey's future says he's a C
Most sites I've checked call him a F, which is probably a good sign that he lined up at more then one position.

We don't know the # from last years NCAA and 24gp in the AHL isn't enough to tell. As a rookie he'll be early change eligible.

Just because a rule works against your (or anyones) opinion doesn't make it flawed. Ideally we all have players dressing only in the positions they are actually playing - but policing and changing that throughout the year would be a nitemare. Our system based on the moat recent accurate info we have, including an early check, is actually rather impressive, IMo.

Nick wroteCOLONBilly dude, choosing those sites is majorly flawed, Totally subjective which to chose.

I.e. Hockey's future says he's a C
Most sites I've checked call him a F, which is probably a good sign that he lined up at more then one position.

We don't know the # from last years NCAA and 24gp in the AHL isn't enough to tell. As a rookie he'll be early change eligible.

Just because a rule works against your (or anyones) opinion doesn't make it flawed. Ideally we all have players dressing only in the positions they are actually playing - but policing and changing that throughout the year would be a nitemare. Our system based on the moat recent accurate info we have, including an early check, is actually rather impressive, IMo.

Can I ask why 26 games was chosen? Seems pretty arbitrary...

Iirc the logic went something like; The primary measure 41 is half way. But for those on the fringe/rookies we need to be able to adjust earlier- so Half of that is 21.5. Then add in some leeway for the first 8 game roster shuffle and you have a reasonable picture of the positions being played, most notably if the player is lining up in the middle frequently.

Read is actually playing W, lol...

the main credible sites for positions claim him a winger, Im not arguing to change the system but If a GM can appeal and prove that an undrafted free agent is playing W than that should be allowed.
BS

Billy I dunno if you are just complaining to complain, but the whole glory of our system is that its not subjective. Many of those 'reliable' sites list him as 'F' or Forward, at least one @ C, and then some as LW/W/Winger...the proof, aka non-subjective measure, will come in those first 26 games. That is how the appeal system works in terms of rookies/players eligible for early review.

He actually hasn't played for the Flyers yet, so as for where he will be playing...I don't disagree that it will be Wing, but I also expect some other players to switch during this first 26 games as well.

No I just think its dumb to rely on CBS' Stock positions for undrafted free agents.

I propose a week 4 Early positional review for all undrafted Free Agents.

But it will be turned down because thats what the CC does now, zero discussion on the rest of the leagues ideas.
what a joke.

bills09 wroteCOLON

Nick wroteCOLONyes.

Our official site is their draft position, and if not that, then the position cbs gives them.

oh cbs such a flawed system.

RW http://forecaster.ca/hockeynews/hockey/player.cgi?7049
RW http://www2.tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?id=7049
RW http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/players/Matt_Read
RW http://flyers.nhl.com/club/player.htm?id=8476177

Im all for this system but for undrafted players it should be the proofs approach of last season...

i have an even worse situation with Marcel Mueller: undrafted, yet to meet our GP requirements to apply our criteria, hence role stays as determined by CBS -> C, even if he is obviously not a C.
But i don't see that as a significant problem:
whenever he will become a relevant player at the NHL level, thus reaching the 26GP threshold, i'll have him as a winger. So i don't care..

Any single source is flawed; there are probably less flawed source than CBS, but this case relates such a limited number of players that i'm not sure it's even worth discussing which is the less flawed system, use it instead of CBS, and change those players positions 26 games earlier than it would happen anyway.

Billy we used tons of input on making these rules, what's really got you all up in a puff?

H MART wroteCOLONI think Moss should have winger eligibility

FOR = .458

doesn't deserve to be a Winger for us... right now at least.