Ryan
First Liner
100%
104-139-33
Posts: 726
|
Post by Ryan on Dec 18, 2007 12:13:07 GMT -5
hey derr just fyi Auld is on a team....Vancouver Canucks lol i seen in the Player of the week you just have the NAFHL logo
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Dec 18, 2007 15:51:32 GMT -5
The Canucks active goalies are Bryzgalov, Mason, and Huet. Players in the minors will not be considered for NAFHL honors under their respective teams ownership because of the lack of fantasy contributions.
|
|
Ryan
First Liner
100%
104-139-33
Posts: 726
|
Post by Ryan on Dec 18, 2007 17:49:20 GMT -5
ok.......
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Dec 19, 2007 1:51:49 GMT -5
I'd definitely say that he should receive the award on his awards page though. Prospects/Minor Leaguers owned by a team shouldn't really be cut out of the loop all together. It should be recognized in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Dec 19, 2007 16:33:48 GMT -5
"Player of the Week" indicates the player had a significant fantasy impact on one's team for that week. To credit a player on the farm with this award obstructs the system. If this is the case, benched shutouts should count toward your total, and players on the farm who accumulate points should also count.
The same theory applies. If you want the points the players on your farm are producing, you make room, use a roster space, and reap the benefits. The same goes for "Player of the Week." If the accolade means that muchto you, make room.
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Dec 19, 2007 18:34:17 GMT -5
If this is the case, benched shutouts should count toward your total, and players on the farm who accumulate points should also count. These things aren't inherently the same though. For instance, if I was to bench Iginla one night and he scored two goals you'd still count his end of the week totals as his contribution to the "Player of the Week" award. I don't personally see the difference, I do see what you're getting at though.
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Dec 20, 2007 18:59:52 GMT -5
Perhaps "implied fantasy contributions" or "the ability to produce fantasy points" would have been better choices of words then.
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Dec 21, 2007 3:14:28 GMT -5
That's fair enough but just to be a dick you could always claim Auld had "the ability to produce fantasy points" (a call up) but didn't. Seriously I don't care much either way.
|
|