Changing player positions Topic

killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
I don't really get the concern about 12 SFs.  You could have a team like that now.  In fact, I can recall someone sitemailing me once to ask why my team had 6 PGs and 6 Centers.  Honestly I hadn't even really noticed it until they asked.  If you're using listed position for anything to do with gameplanning, you're doing something wrong imo.
5/22/2014 2:09 PM
killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
And if it wasn't clear, I definitely support this change.  I just had my starting SF make 2nd team all-conf PG because he's listed as a PG (he is in no way an actual PG).  I would love to see those ridiculous awards situations go away.
5/22/2014 2:10 PM
gomiami1972
Posts: 3710 (4)
Hall of Famer
10 1 1 550 49 118
Pro
Posted by dacj501 on 5/22/2014 2:07:00 PM (view original):
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?
Personally, I don't care.  HBD allows for a player's primary position to be defined at any point in the regular season...HD could easily do the same thing.  I posted this because some people seem concerned that games will be played with this feature and I was trying to come up with a possible limiter. 

WIS could always define award eligibility based on a minimum of minutes played by position.  That would stop someone trying to switch a dynamite PG who played 600 minutes at PG and then for the last game of the season gets switched to a SG with the hopes of collecting some SG hardware.
5/22/2014 2:16 PM
killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
Good point about HBD.  You can change the listed position(s) at any point in that game--which I find very helpful--but I'm pretty sure awards use games/innings where they've played and not the listed position.
5/22/2014 2:19 PM
dacj501
Posts: 4779 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 305
Pro
Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/22/2014 2:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dacj501 on 5/22/2014 2:07:00 PM (view original):
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?
Personally, I don't care.  HBD allows for a player's primary position to be defined at any point in the regular season...HD could easily do the same thing.  I posted this because some people seem concerned that games will be played with this feature and I was trying to come up with a possible limiter. 

WIS could always define award eligibility based on a minimum of minutes played by position.  That would stop someone trying to switch a dynamite PG who played 600 minutes at PG and then for the last game of the season gets switched to a SG with the hopes of collecting some SG hardware.
I think that's what seble intends down the road
5/22/2014 2:20 PM
utahjazz88
Posts: 44 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 92 1 13
Prospect
I agree. If a coach puts all players at the same position, it would be a pain and take longer to gameplan.  I don't think people will want to spend more time gameplanning.  Also, let's say you play a PF at PG, then it's a pretty sure bet that he wouldn't win any awards at PG since his stats wouldn't be good PG stats.  
5/22/2014 2:22 PM
jetwildcat
Posts: 1204 (0)
Hall of Famer
198 3
Prospect
While looking at listed positions is not the most "effective" way to gameplan, not every HD customer should be required to work the same way. I'm willing to sacrifice some game planning effectiveness to save time, for example.

Also remember that we now have ratings calculations that people are using, which are position based.

Just because something is mostly cosmetic doesn't mean it's useless. The cosmetic parts of the game make it even more fun, especially for new players, whom aren't blind to the same cosmetic things we've all learned to ignore over thousands of hours.
5/22/2014 2:22 PM
utahjazz88
Posts: 44 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 92 1 13
Prospect
I think the only reason why people wanted this change was so awards would represent what positions the players actually play.  I honestly do not believe it makes it easier to set the gameplan by allowing them to adjust their players' listed positions.  Once we set the depth chart, it's pretty simple and I don't think the listed position even matters.  I think the better change would just fix the awards process, so it gives awards based on position played in games (like HBD does).  So if a player plays most of his games at 1 position, then he'd be eligible at that position.  That would be a much better solution.  
5/22/2014 2:26 PM
killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
While looking at listed positions is not the most "effective" way to gameplan, not every HD customer should be required to work the same way.
My point wasn't that everyone should be doing it the same way, but that using that as a reason not to make this change is illogical.  You or anyone else are certainly welcome to gameplan based on listed position, but there is a good chance either now or after this potential change that you will be looking at misleading information.
5/22/2014 2:28 PM
gomiami1972
Posts: 3710 (4)
Hall of Famer
10 1 1 550 49 118
Pro
Posted by utahjazz88 on 5/22/2014 2:26:00 PM (view original):
I think the only reason why people wanted this change was so awards would represent what positions the players actually play.  I honestly do not believe it makes it easier to set the gameplan by allowing them to adjust their players' listed positions.  Once we set the depth chart, it's pretty simple and I don't think the listed position even matters.  I think the better change would just fix the awards process, so it gives awards based on position played in games (like HBD does).  So if a player plays most of his games at 1 position, then he'd be eligible at that position.  That would be a much better solution.  

I guess I'll respectfully disagree.  I've been playing this game for a very long time and would find this change extremely useful...and it has nothing to do with awards.  It has everything to do with managing my roster.

However, it's not a change that I think warrants going to war over.  If selbe decides to implement it, I will be happy.  If selbe decides to pass on the idea, life will continue as will my involvement with HD.

5/22/2014 2:31 PM
jetwildcat
Posts: 1204 (0)
Hall of Famer
198 3
Prospect
Posted by killbatman on 5/22/2014 2:29:00 PM (view original):
While looking at listed positions is not the most "effective" way to gameplan, not every HD customer should be required to work the same way.
My point wasn't that everyone should be doing it the same way, but that using that as a reason not to make this change is illogical.  You or anyone else are certainly welcome to gameplan based on listed position, but there is a good chance either now or after this potential change that you will be looking at misleading information.
Game planning against 12 Sf's would be worse than it is now, despite how flawed it already is. There's gotta be a better way.
5/22/2014 2:35 PM
gillispie1
Posts: 5030 (0)
Hall of Famer
95
Veteran
Posted by jetwildcat on 5/22/2014 2:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by killbatman on 5/22/2014 2:29:00 PM (view original):
While looking at listed positions is not the most "effective" way to gameplan, not every HD customer should be required to work the same way.
My point wasn't that everyone should be doing it the same way, but that using that as a reason not to make this change is illogical.  You or anyone else are certainly welcome to gameplan based on listed position, but there is a good chance either now or after this potential change that you will be looking at misleading information.
Game planning against 12 Sf's would be worse than it is now, despite how flawed it already is. There's gotta be a better way.
i think realistically the number of coaches who would set all their players to sfs, which would be pretty annoying from a trying to manage your own team perspective, is not that high. its a concern, but im really not that worried about it.
5/22/2014 2:38 PM
killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
I think it's approximately equal to the concern that right now you could face a team that recruited 12 SFs.
5/22/2014 2:47 PM
bbunch
Posts: 1301 (0)
Hall of Famer
607 3 1
Pro
A few ideas.....

With Seble's model, to prevent things from getting ridiculous, wouldn't it be pretty easy to place a limit on how many of each listed position? (there would be a limit that wouldn't' allow more than 5 SF's, for instance.) 

After thinking about it...........I think it would be best to just be an automatic position listing that is based  on minutes played at the position. Would that be too difficult to code? I could see coaches listing their C as PG and vice versa just to confuse people for a competitive advantage. 



5/22/2014 2:56 PM
seble
Posts: 878 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 170
Prospect
The drawback to basing on playing time is that you'd theoretically have to wait quite a while for a player to become eligible.  I like the idea of being able to adjust positions immediately upon recruits showing up.  The one idea that makes sense to me is limiting it to a window of time, possibly up until the regular season starts.  That way, a player is set for that season at least.
5/22/2014 3:05 PM
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4|5...13 Next ▸
Changing player positions Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.