All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Changing player positions
5/23/2014 8:47 AM
some sort of toggle - adjusted view/original view.....thing
5/23/2014 9:45 AM
Posted by seble on 5/23/2014 8:44:00 AM (view original):
Posted by utahjazz88 on 5/22/2014 11:20:00 PM (view original):
I agree with jaymc and davis.  I don't want to make gameplanning any more of a burden than it is right now.  It will be more confusing to gameplan if your opponent has 11 SFs.  I don't see why any wise coach would not put as many players as possible at one position in order to confuse opponents.  If you want to fix awards, just base awards on majority games started in season.  A potential workaround for coaches setting 11 guys at 1 position is to allow opponents the option to view that team's original positions. (Just like you allow coaches to change the view from regular ratings to player roles) This way when gameplanning, it won't make it any harder for the opposition.  
Interesting possibility.  I will be saving the original position for players, so it wouldn't be too hard to allow a user setting specifying whether they want to see the original position or the current position.  I'll play around with this idea as it may be enough to mitigate the possibility of screwing up game planning.
I want a third option: "I don't give a damn because using a opposing player's listed position as some valuable part of gameplanning is weird."

Seriously, what's up with you people?  It says "SG" on that one page and that affects how you gameplan?  Jeezus.

Anyway, I support the change.  I'd like to list my players where they actually play.

5/23/2014 1:02 PM
Posted by seble on 5/23/2014 8:44:00 AM (view original):
Posted by utahjazz88 on 5/22/2014 11:20:00 PM (view original):
I agree with jaymc and davis.  I don't want to make gameplanning any more of a burden than it is right now.  It will be more confusing to gameplan if your opponent has 11 SFs.  I don't see why any wise coach would not put as many players as possible at one position in order to confuse opponents.  If you want to fix awards, just base awards on majority games started in season.  A potential workaround for coaches setting 11 guys at 1 position is to allow opponents the option to view that team's original positions. (Just like you allow coaches to change the view from regular ratings to player roles) This way when gameplanning, it won't make it any harder for the opposition.  
Interesting possibility.  I will be saving the original position for players, so it wouldn't be too hard to allow a user setting specifying whether they want to see the original position or the current position.  I'll play around with this idea as it may be enough to mitigate the possibility of screwing up game planning.
Yes that would be great seble.  
5/23/2014 1:03 PM
i like the toggle idea. also, i think its perfectly normal to look at listed positions for brief game planning - scanning that first page can be done extremely quickly, and for many people, it gives them all the info they care to have. i'd never recommend game planning for a NT game or anything that way, but i think its probably pretty common, and theres nothing wrong with it.
5/23/2014 1:03 PM
I like the change but with beginning of 1) Conference, 2) Regular Season.
5/23/2014 1:59 PM (edited)
Posted by seble on 5/22/2014 1:07:00 PM (view original):
I've worked up a page to allow a coach to change listed positions for players.  The plan is to allow unlimited changing, but there is logic in place to limit the options for a player to positions that are reasonable given the player's ratings.  Most players will be eligible for 3 positions, but some will be eligible for only 2 or possibly 4.  I haven't seen a player be eligible for all 5 in my testing, but it's theoretically possible.

Can anyone think of problems that this will cause, or restrictions that need to be applied to it?

I really like this. I have kids I recruit, making notes to myself, "PG -- recruit as SG." Then I sign them & have a talk with them about changing position. I would like to be able to reflect the reality of what position they actually play. Also helps me at a glance to know how balanced my classes are and what my needs are. 

I am not concerned about gamesmanship. Let people assign whatever position they like. In the NCAA, centers are sometimes listed as forwards for psychological reasons; same thing with guards listed as forwards.

I echo the suggestion to let us give kids numbers. Another example of something that does not impact gameplay, but is fun.


5/23/2014 2:02 PM
Posted by utahjazz88 on 5/22/2014 11:20:00 PM (view original):
I agree with jaymc and davis.  I don't want to make gameplanning any more of a burden than it is right now.  It will be more confusing to gameplan if your opponent has 11 SFs.  I don't see why any wise coach would not put as many players as possible at one position in order to confuse opponents.  If you want to fix awards, just base awards on majority games started in season.  A potential workaround for coaches setting 11 guys at 1 position is to allow opponents the option to view that team's original positions. (Just like you allow coaches to change the view from regular ratings to player roles) This way when gameplanning, it won't make it any harder for the opposition.  
Gameplanning is easier if players are listed at the position they play.

Me listing my PG at the position he plays, SG, will occur more often than this "11 Guys at S"F meme which has gathered force like Millionaire Welfare Queens.
5/23/2014 2:25 PM
did seble address whether we are going to be locked into playing a player at a specific position once they're designated or will we still have the option to play any player at any position no matter what they were originally listed as and what we changed their listed position to?
5/23/2014 2:32 PM
The more I hear people half-assedly complain about seeing 12 SF on a roster, the more it makes me wish there was a world for hardcore users where there were only 3 position listings (guard, forward, center) and the only player ratings a coach has access to are there own players.

Now that would be interesting, it would take evaluating your opponents to a whole new level.
5/23/2014 2:39 PM
I think it'd confuse a lot of newer players, especially if it's simply cosmetic and is mostly going to be used to game awards and confuse opponants.

What about having it where the owner can see the new positions (for organization purposes, such as "what positions do I need to recruit for in 2 seasons?") but other teams see the original positions?
5/23/2014 2:46 PM
Posted by jtt8355 on 5/23/2014 2:25:00 PM (view original):
did seble address whether we are going to be locked into playing a player at a specific position once they're designated or will we still have the option to play any player at any position no matter what they were originally listed as and what we changed their listed position to?
yes, and no, there won't be any such restrictions. listed position will remain cosmetic.
5/23/2014 3:06 PM
Posted by trobone on 5/23/2014 2:39:00 PM (view original):
I think it'd confuse a lot of newer players, especially if it's simply cosmetic and is mostly going to be used to game awards and confuse opponants.

What about having it where the owner can see the new positions (for organization purposes, such as "what positions do I need to recruit for in 2 seasons?") but other teams see the original positions?
Wow, "mostly going to be used to game awards and confuse opponents"...two pretty BIG assumptions.

Especially, since others have laid out specific reasons why this would not only be purely cosmetic, but could also benefit new users by enhancing the "player roles" feature...and not to mention that seble actually liked the notion of all coaches being able to toggle back & forth between players' original and designated positions.
5/23/2014 3:44 PM
I support the change Seble. To those complaining about the 12 SF's, how is that any different than it is now when someone recruits 3/4 of a team of guards or plays most of his starting lineup out of position (sg at pg, pg at sg, pf at sf or c etc)? It takes less than 10 seconds to go look at your opponents depth chart for their last game.

Personal preference is on locking it when conference play starts or basing it on some percentage of time played at a position (so if player is a backup at sg and pg, but plays 60% of his time at sg vs 40% at pg, then he's automatically listed as a sg).

There are 2 benefits here imo. First off, it would help guys in planning their future recruiting/depth chart. Someone mentioned already forgetting he had a PF he planned to play at SF and would have unnecessarily recruited a SF (yes this is still the coaches fault for carelessness). I had the same situation this season and wasted some money on a recruit I didn't really need before I realized it. More importantly though, it fixes end of season awards. I had a sg playing pg many seasons ago. He was far better than any of the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd team AA pg's, but since he was listed as a sg, he got ranked there as 2nd team instead of first and my sg who was actually playing sg, got bumped down to honorable mention when he may have been 3rd team.

5/23/2014 3:55 PM (edited)
I think "public" and "private" position listings are really two different things.

If the AP had a "best PG" award, they would not ask coaches' opinions on what their own players' "positions" are.

At the same time, coaches do not label their own players based on public opinion.


I think the ideal system would have a public position based on where he plays (from minutes and/or depth chart), meanwhile, you can "assign" a role to a player, and that role can show up in place of your player's position, if you so choose. The role could be "PG" or "Swingman" or "Hype-Man", whatever you want. Maybe you can choose 3 that go on his page (PG: 98 SG: 88 Hype-Man: 100)
5/23/2014 3:51 PM
Also, from an HD marketing standpoint, I think "12 SF's on a team of not-actually SF's...would look really stupid" is a 100% legitimate complaint. REGARDLESS of whether it should impact proper gameplanning.

Why list official positions at all, if you don't care about 12 SF teams?

Why not remove every cosmetic aspect of the game?
of 13
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Changing player positions

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.