Posted by seble on 5/22/2014 1:29:00 PM (view original):
Listed position does not impact anything in the engine or on the depth chart.  It's mainly for organizational purposes (i.e. sorting roster, filtering on certain pages).  This change would not limit anything in any way.  The only potential impact I could think of is on awards (as dacj501 pointed out). 

it doesn't impact draft picks at all? that would be my concern, i remember you had changed it so players could be considered for positions other than their listed position - but are those all done equally? like, is a C today just as likely to be drafted to play SF in the NBA if they have identical ratings to an actual SF? even if players aren't drafted to actual positions (which i presume is the case), we understood that the draft at least used to draft based on listed position to some extent, which is why i am concerned about that.

IMHO if you are only looking at listed position and the stats page to guess who is starting where - AND if determining who is starting where is important to you for gameplanning - then it is foolish NOT to look at a few individual game box scores and see for real who DID start where. Since that is my belief, a team of 12 SFs would be an irrelevant thing to me since I am going to look up where they really play myself anyway - and so should you (proverbial) if it matters to you...

Some people have asked for this change, which I too find mostly irrelevant, but since it doesn't really seem like it can hurt anything why not add it for those who really want it?

Posted by guyo26 on 5/22/2014 1:30:00 PM (view original):
I don't see huge value in this, and I think it's very possible for people to game for unintended consequences.  Since there is no longer (I believe) a penalty for playing a player "out of position", why re-position him?  I played a guy in the NT that had 12 PF's, and he made the sweet sixteen plus, what's the benefit of changing a listed position?

This is mainly to make it easier for a coach to keep track of where you have guys slotted.  For example, maybe you end up with 5 PGs, but you actually play 2 of them strictly at SG.  It's nicer to see those players listed correctly at SG. 

If coaches used this feature honestly, then it would actually improve the awards process, as it would compare players at the correct position.

Posted by gillispie1 on 5/22/2014 1:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seble on 5/22/2014 1:29:00 PM (view original):
Listed position does not impact anything in the engine or on the depth chart.  It's mainly for organizational purposes (i.e. sorting roster, filtering on certain pages).  This change would not limit anything in any way.  The only potential impact I could think of is on awards (as dacj501 pointed out). 

it doesn't impact draft picks at all? that would be my concern, i remember you had changed it so players could be considered for positions other than their listed position - but are those all done equally? like, is a C today just as likely to be drafted to play SF in the NBA if they have identical ratings to an actual SF?

Listed position is not used in draft evaluations.

I don't really care too much either way.  I understand the little impact it will have for awards, but also can see people going a little too crazy with it.  So whatever is decided, I'll just go with it.

ok, sounds good to me

Eventually I'd like to start tracking minutes played by position, which would be a much better way to address this.

The suggestions above about facing a team of all SF's or an ever-changing set of listed positions is a concern.  I'd also wonder whether the redshirting logic might be affected by this (e.g. move a big group of players to one listed position and try to RS the worst of those and see what happens).  If it would affect EE, then that is a concern as well.

The ideal restriction would be that the player would actually have to play that position a certain number of minutes before being eligible for the switch (or certain number of starts).  I would think that limiting to 1 switch or 2 switches per coach per season and only allowing position bumps of 1 spot (PG to SG or SF to either SG or PF) would prevent craziness.

Posted by rogelio on 5/22/2014 1:38:00 PM (view original):
The suggestions above about facing a team of all SF's or an ever-changing set of listed positions is a concern.  I'd also wonder whether the redshirting logic might be affected by this (e.g. move a big group of players to one listed position and try to RS the worst of those and see what happens).  If it would affect EE, then that is a concern as well.

The ideal restriction would be that the player would actually have to play that position a certain number of minutes before being eligible for the switch (or certain number of starts).  I would think that limiting to 1 switch or 2 switches per coach per season and only allowing position bumps of 1 spot (PG to SG or SF to either SG or PF) would prevent craziness.

i like limiting to 2-3 switches per season to prevent craziness :)

Posted by seble on 5/22/2014 1:38:00 PM (view original):
Eventually I'd like to start tracking minutes played by position, which would be a much better way to address this.

That

I must be doing something wrong because I dont even notice a player's listed position when gameplanning...

Posted by dacj501 on 5/22/2014 1:48:00 PM (view original):
I must be doing something wrong because I dont even notice a player's listed position when gameplanning...

Good for you, dac

Posted by jetwildcat on 5/22/2014 1:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dacj501 on 5/22/2014 1:48:00 PM (view original):
I must be doing something wrong because I dont even notice a player's listed position when gameplanning...

Good for you, dac

is it? maybe...

I suggested this proposal yesterday on another forum thread.  Shenanigans could be limited by allowing position changes only prior to the first regular season game.  After that point, a position remains the same throughout the rest of the season no matter where I decide to slot a player.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/22/2014 2:05:00 PM (view original):
I suggested this proposal yesterday on another forum thread.  Shenanigans could be limited by allowing position changes only prior to the first regular season game.  After that point, a position remains the same throughout the rest of the season no matter where I decide to slot a player.

what if over the course of the season that PG goes up 25 pts in PER and now you play him at SG instead - seems like if you are going to have this as a feature just let people do what they will with it. If suddenly there are 12000 SFs in a world maybe look at corrections?