Position Eligibility: The Few, The Proud

Updated: March 15, 2010 at 7:12 pm by Alexander Monaghan

For our loyal readers using Yahoo! Sports, this one’s for you.  We all remember the fiasco last year with missing our ‘Team Log’ and how Cam Ward STILL is not on IR, but today we will discuss one of the most valuable roster change: position eligibility.

On March 11th, Yahoo updated their database by added a LW position to Blackhawks sniper Patrick Sharp.  Owned in 87 percent of leagues, Sharp boasts the most positions of any player in the game making his rank closer to a top ten forward.  Those of you playing in head-to-head leagues can usher him around any forward position, perfectly mixing and matching your lineups with the best of them.

Baseball lovers understand just how valuable a multi-positioned player is for the team, us hockey fans deserve a similar advantage during the season.

For some reason Yahoo! updated the positions of Brock Trotter and Jay Rosehill that same day but still leave T.J. Oshie without his RW position or David Backes without a C to the right of his name.

Besides Sharp players like Joe Pavelski, Patrick Marleau, Tomas Fleischmann, Rene Bourque, Michael Frolik, Brooks Laich, Bobby Ryan, Guillaume Latendresse, Daniel Briere, Todd Bertuzzi, Loui Eriksson, Matt Carkner, Nik Antropov and Andy McDonald all saw their fantasy value rise due to playing more than one spot.

Peter Mueller strikes me as a must add due to this shortage.  We mentioned Mueller while he was on the Coyotes and again after his trade to the Avalanche but he finds himself one of the few multi-position players lacking a full-time fantasy role.

Since joining the Avs the former 8th overall pick posted eight points in six games, playing a huge role with the man advantage.  Those in the head-to-head playoffs need to add this valuable winger before the rest of the league catches on as he truly makes all the difference in a league without a maximum games cap.

The following two tabs change content below.
Bookmark and Share

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Disqus