Jump to content

BenB17

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    998

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

 Content Type 

Posts posted by BenB17

  2. Fantasy First Hockey Podcast

    in The Peanut Gallery

    Posted

    6 hours ago, James said:

    Re: takeaways… I think Scotty’s making valid points here. But I want stats that are easily found in multiple places (I.e. nhl.com, ESPN, tsn, etc). Are you able to find “first goals” there? The answer might be yes… I haven’t looked.

     

    I also don’t want stats that count multiple times. Score a first goal and you’ve just gone +1 in 4 categories, maybe even 5 if it’s a shorty. (G, SOG, STG, +\-, in addition to first goal)
     

    and I want stats where you get a lot in a week (more than 20, ideally, but I’ll settle for 10+). 
     

    Takeaways checks those three boxes. 
     

    you’ve got this fourth criterium of wanting to be able to see it visually. I get it, but those other three are more important, imo. 
     

    find me an offensive stat that checks all four boxes and I’m game!


    I maintain that if you can’t see a takeaway, you either don’t know hockey or aren’t looking hard enough! 

  4. Fantasy First Hockey Podcast

    in The Peanut Gallery

    Posted

    19 minutes ago, Festivus said:

    Yes a goal like that should not be considered a GWG. A GWG should only be a GWG in 1 goal games or 2 goal games when an empty netter has been scored. But in any case, I know Ben, how much you love the takeaway, as you staunchly defend it time and time again, but you will never convince me how great it is. 

    I do see the argument, don't get me wrong, But I would argue that even First Goals might be better! Anyway, the debate has been raised before, it is what it is. I'm not all that interested in more back and forth on it. We could settle this the usual way.....

     


     I actually voted for a different category to use when we were removing GWG… but takeaways are still better than GWG. Just trying to make sure James doesn’t get too influenced by you complainers into reverting back is all 😉

    • Approve 1

  5. Fantasy First Hockey Podcast

    in The Peanut Gallery

    Posted · Edited by BenB17

    32 minutes ago, Festivus said:

    Ok but what emotion is a takeaway in overtime if you don't even recognize it happen?


    I’d argue that takeaways are pretty noticeable.. Especially in OT. You don’t recognize when your team gains control of the puck from a little extra touch of effort or skill? Think body check, interception, stick check, etc.. especially in overtime, a takeaway often leads to a breakaway or odd man rush. 
     

    Not a perfect fantasy stat by any means, but much better than GWG which is generally dependant on the rest of the team scoring goals too. Foegele can only score a game winning goal because McDavid already scored 4 goals earlier. No McDavid, no game winning goal for Foegele. Technically all 5 goals are game winning because they would lose without the first ones too. And like James said, what’s so special about scoring a random goal 10 minutes into the game that ends up being the game winner? 

    • Stick Tap 1

  6. Marner on D

    in NHL News & Rumors

    Posted · Edited by BenB17

    7 hours ago, Ralphdog said:

    Wow, good call. But is position eligibility adjusted based on Game Day registered line-ups or on shifts taken at a certain position? The latter doesn't seem feasible and the former would likely never have Marner listed at D on a registered line-up. I wish I knew how more parts of life work.


    I looked into it last year and emailed Fantrax (because I desperately wanted Stephenson to get Winger eligibility 😂) and Fantrax said the rough rule they use is 10 games played at a position will trigger them to add a position. They also take into consideration the permanency of the change and if it’s likely to happen again (if due to someone else’s injury), and other subtle reasons like that. Doesn’t explain how they determine eligibility at season start, but at least puts some light on the logic. I do believe they use a third party data resource for eligibility and then can adjust from that as they see fit. 
     

    I’d guess Marner never gets D eligibility similar to how forwards who play “D” on the powerplay don’t get eligibility. They may be replacing a defenseman on the ice, but they are definitely not there to act as a defensemen. Especially if it is only in certain situations like late in the game down by a goal spots. In that sense it is very similar to power play situations. 

    • Stick Tap 1
×
×
  • Create New...