The first criteria you mention is objective, quantifiable and can be easily understood by anyone who competes in a Yahoo fantasy hoops league; five games played at a given position = eligibilty at that position.

The second criteria, however, is so subjective as to be virtually meaningless. If it is indeed true that Yahoo reserves the right to award or not award position eligiblity based on its “perception” as to whether or not a player actually looks the part, well that’s just downright goofy. Worse, it seems irresponsible considering how many thousands of people participate in Yahoo based leagues.

My guess is that this so-called “perception” is probably heavily based on the name-recognition of the players involved. When stars like Chris Bosh or Rasheed Wallace play five games at center, they’re promptly rewarded with C eligibility. But when a “no-name” second year PF, Mike Sweetney, plays more than half a season at center for the Knicks, he’s somehow “perceived” as looking not enough like a center to warrant any change in position eligibility.

1 player has started at least 5 games at a position that season or the previous season. (ex Boris Diaw has started 3 games at C and needs to start 2 more to be a C)

2 someone at Yahoo! perceives a player to play a certain position. (someone at Yahoo! decides that Eddie Griffin doesn’t look like a C, thus is not a C)

Yahoo’s decisions on who does or does not merit center eligibility are as shrouded in mystery as Bush’s plan for “victory” in Iraq. There seems to be no rhyme or reason there.

Rasheed Wallace, for example, seems to have perpetual C status despite the fact that he spells Big Ben there only sporadically. On the opposite side of the coin you have Mike Sweetney, who played almost exclusively at center for the Knicks after Muhammad was traded last season yet reamins eligible for PF only.

Yes, it’s frustrating but like evrything else in this game you make your best educated guess as to what will occur (in this case, what Yahoo will do) and make your moves in anticipation of that event occuring. It would be nice, though, if an entity as large as Yahoo was a bit more clear and consistent about its criteria for awarding C eligibility.

I have a question of my own today, I’ve been patient with Magloire so far for him to ‘figure out’ the Bucks’ offense. But he just doesn’t seem to be turning it around at all, should I drop him for Pryzbilla since it seems like Ratliff can’t play 2 consecutive games?

Looking at your list serves to reinforce the notion that there are an awful lot of useless stiffs clogging up the paint in NBA arenas. Obviously, many coaches are aware of this too and probably would not be averse to trying a more gifted PF at the center spot. It seems this has already happened in Toronto, where Mitchell has concluded that a skinny Chris Bosh - who routinely cedes 40-50 pounds to a typical NBA center - is still a better option in the pivot than the likes of Araujo or Woods.

Chicago is one such situation that currently bears watching. If Chandler’s stamina problems persist, Sweetney figures to gain more time at the 5 and could wind up getting C eligiblity, thereby increasing his value significantly. Boston could be another; if Blout, LaFrentz, Perkins continue to disappoint, maybe Rivers tries Jefferson in the middle. Eddie Griffin replacing Olowakandi in Minny is another switch that would seem to make sense, considering that Eddie grabs more boards and blocks more shots in 10 minutes than ‘kandi will in an entire week.

But the one change I’d really, really like to see is in Orlando. Both Cato and Battie have been stiffs thus far and… well, you know what this Dwight Howard owner dreams of for Christmas.

Anyway, here’s my suggestion: You might want to keep your readers apprised on which talented non-centers are seeing playing time at the C position so they can get a jump on grabbing them prior to their getting C eligibility. This would be an especially useful feature for readers (like myself) who compete in leagues that start two centers.