Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

johnd2442

What Hosting Platform do you use?

Do you play in an ESPN or Yahoo league (or another website)?   70 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you play in an ESPN or Yahoo! league...or a league hosted by another website?

    • ESPN
    • Yahoo!
    • Another website that isn't ESPN or Yahoo (please comment with what website it is if you would be so kind)

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

68 posts in this topic

Just intrigued about a consensus in what the fantasy basketballers prefer around these parts. Personally, I play in a Yahoo! league. I prefer it mainly because it has an outstanding Android app. I love ESPN's layout, but I'm amazed that they don't have a fantasy basketball Android app (at least the last time I looked), especially since their fantasy football Android app is fantastic. To me, that is a deal breaker. I did use ESPN for my league last season and it went well enough.

I used to use a website called sports.ws and it was a really intriguing setup, but for my specific league, it wasn't the greatest fit. I was also curious if anyone else used any other websites besides ESPN or Yahoo.

By the way, if this is too off topic, please feel free to move or simply delete this, Moderators. Apologies in advance if it is off topic. I thought that it had bearing on fantasy basketball and even on strategy regarding the fact that I can check up on my team/league with the Yahoo app anytime whereas I couldn't with ESPN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i started out playing in yahoo then moved to espn like 2 years ago. there really is no comparison imo. after using espn i cant stand playing in yahoo. i havent used any other sites tho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't agree less after using ESPN last year. To me, they are completely equal - there are good parts to both sites and big limitations to both sites. In addition, I can't see anything wrong with Yahoo and certainly disagree ESPN is any semblance of a significant upgrade and certainly disagree with any kind of a blanket statement that one is far and away better...because it is untrue I feel even more strongly when nothing specific is brought up as to *why* one site is better in someone's opinion. There is a reason why both sites are the biggest ones on the intarwebz (CBS Sportsline is still big, but not as big as Yahoo or ESPN).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't agree less after using ESPN last year. To me, they are completely equal - there are good parts to both sites and big limitations to both sites. In addition, I can't see anything wrong with Yahoo and certainly disagree ESPN is any semblance of a significant upgrade and certainly disagree with any kind of a blanket statement that one is far and away better...because it is untrue I feel even more strongly when nothing specific is brought up as to *why* one site is better in someone's opinion. There is a reason why both sites are the biggest ones on the intarwebz (CBS Sportsline is still big, but not as big as Yahoo or ESPN).

Yeah, they both have their ups and downs. Yahoo has the (off the top of my head) superior stat tracker, line-up setting, teams stats/record books/etc (basically a better toolbar).

For some reason, Yahoo has this issue with lag when browsing though the pages. ESPN is nice and fast.

On the ESPN side, the auto-updating box score "stat tracker" is pretty nice. I actually like it. The FantasyCast I never touch. Being able to view transaction history of each player is really nice. Doesnt have a one click set line-up, but it's still quick and easy manually.

ESPN has the superior player stats/player card. Being able to view recent games or track averages of a player's certain month is handy.

Combine features from both platforms and you'd have a flawless fantasy time.

Personally, I use both.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, they both have their ups and downs. Yahoo has the (off the top of my head) superior stat tracker, line-up setting, teams stats/record books/etc (basically a better toolbar).

For some reason, Yahoo has this issue with lag when browsing though the pages. ESPN is nice and fast.

On the ESPN side, the auto-updating box score "stat tracker" is pretty nice. I actually like it. The FantasyCast I never touch. Being able to view transaction history of each player is really nice. Doesnt have a one click set line-up, but it's still quick and easy manually.

ESPN has the superior player stats/player card. Being able to view recent games or track averages of a player's certain month is handy.

Interesting, I've never noticed a lag with Yahoo. I do like ESPN's player stats/player card. Not only that, on the ESPN player card, you can tell what teams a player has been on,when he was dropped/traded which I really liked with fantasy football.

I should use Yahoo's Stat Tracker more as I rarely use it since Yahoo updates the scores in real time anyway. But I agree - Yahoo's tool bar is excellent.

However, regarding record books/league history, that is a big thing for my league, and I've been impressed with ESPN's for fantasy football. I don't know how it is for fantasy basketball, but I'm intrigued with Yahoo's going forward to see how it compares/contrasts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://hoops.sports.ws/

Best fantasy game by far

Yahoo iand ESPN are both terrible, they dont reward per minute production and its just all about who plays the most minutes, Boring as hell.

ANd I dont understand how people can play weekly games, that is boring as hell.

On Sports.ws you follow the real NBA schedule with a real b\oxcscore, so you play 3-5 games per week. And you can have guys that playy only 15 minutes a game who are a valuable part of your team, if they have good per minute numbers.

Whereas guys who play big minutes but arent very productive dont have a lot of value , unlike in Yahoo and ESPN where they are worshiped cos they might get 14 points, 6 rebs, 3 steals and 2 blocks but need 43 minutes to get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having used both, ESPN absolutely blows Yahoo! out of the water. And fortunately for me, ESPN has an iOS fantasy app!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play in both Yahoo and Espn.

Yahoo: basketball and football

Espn: baseball.

I prefer yahoo over espn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://hoops.sports.ws/

Best fantasy game by far

Yahoo iand ESPN are both terrible, they dont reward per minute production and its just all about who plays the most minutes, Boring as hell.

ANd I dont understand how people can play weekly games, that is boring as hell.

On Sports.ws you follow the real NBA schedule with a real b\oxcscore, so you play 3-5 games per week.

Well, obviously this isn't true, that Yahoo and ESPN are terrible. That kind of destroys any veracity that the rest of your post has actually, so I won't bother with the rest even though I've previously used sports.ws. Unfortunately, while sports.ws does a few things well, and it is a very creative and entertaining idea, it isn't nearly the end-all, be-all as you're making it out to be.

Having used both, ESPN absolutely blows Yahoo! out of the water. And fortunately for me, ESPN has an iOS fantasy app!

Also, another post that makes no sense since no reasons are given regarding ESPN being better (which it isn't, and vice-versa).

I'm intrigued that most can't quite understand that it all comes down to preference and that neither Yahoo or ESPN is better than the other. In addition, that so far anyway, there is a startling lack of objectivity. This thread is very revealing for me. There is a reason why a balanced amount of people in the poll (at least as of right now) play in both leagues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, they both have their ups and downs. Yahoo has the (off the top of my head) superior stat tracker, line-up setting, teams stats/record books/etc (basically a better toolbar).

For some reason, Yahoo has this issue with lag when browsing though the pages. ESPN is nice and fast.

On the ESPN side, the auto-updating box score "stat tracker" is pretty nice. I actually like it. The FantasyCast I never touch. Being able to view transaction history of each player is really nice. Doesnt have a one click set line-up, but it's still quick and easy manually.

ESPN has the superior player stats/player card. Being able to view recent games or track averages of a player's certain month is handy.

Interesting, I've never noticed a lag with Yahoo. I do like ESPN's player stats/player card. Not only that, on the ESPN player card, you can tell what teams a player has been on,when he was dropped/traded which I really liked with fantasy football.

I should use Yahoo's Stat Tracker more as I rarely use it since Yahoo updates the scores in real time anyway. But I agree - Yahoo's tool bar is excellent.

However, regarding record books/league history, that is a big thing for my league, and I've been impressed with ESPN's for fantasy football. I don't know how it is for fantasy basketball, but I'm intrigued with Yahoo's going forward to see how it compares/contrasts.

I dont recall having this lag problem with Yahoo before. It seemed to pop up this season - for me at least. On Chrome, it was bad. On Firefox which I'm mainly using now, it's bearable. Clicking on a page has a noticeable pause. If I were to manually set my line-up by dragging the blue box, the movement is slow and clunky.

Now that I think about it, I almost always prefer to do my player research on ESPN when ever I'm dealing with my Yahoo fantasy leagues.

From what I see, ESPN has the "Season Stats" page that shows the team totals for each category, but it's missing the "fun" stats like most points in a week or best FG% in a week that Yahoo offers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, another post that makes no sense since no reasons are given regarding ESPN being better (which it isn't, and vice-versa).

I'm intrigued that most can't quite understand that it all comes down to preference and that neither Yahoo or ESPN is better than the other. In addition, that so far anyway, there is a startling lack of objectivity. This thread is very revealing for me. There is a reason why a balanced amount of people in the poll (at least as of right now) play in both leagues.

You made a poll and I voted and posted which one I chose for. No reason to attack it as something that "makes no sense" when you're the one asking for everyone's opinion...Unless the point of this thread is for you to just mock everyone's opinion?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use Yahoo! because it is the official fantasy provider of Rotoworld.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, another post that makes no sense since no reasons are given regarding ESPN being better (which it isn't, and vice-versa).

I'm intrigued that most can't quite understand that it all comes down to preference and that neither Yahoo or ESPN is better than the other. In addition, that so far anyway, there is a startling lack of objectivity. This thread is very revealing for me. There is a reason why a balanced amount of people in the poll (at least as of right now) play in both leagues.

You made a poll and I voted and posted which one I chose for. No reason to attack it as something that "makes no sense" when you're the one asking for everyone's opinion...Unless the point of this thread is for you to just mock everyone's opinion?

Thankfully, no attacking was done. It was a reaction to an opinion with no backing to it whatsoever...which strips the validity of the opinion. Sorry you took that personally. And while I wouldn't mock anyone for having an opinion, I'll gladly criticize anyone who can't give one solitary reasonable example of why their opinion has merit, especially when the opinion seems pretty inaccurate. Criticizing is worlds different than attacking. In this case, in my opinion, which I explained, it was deserved.

I use Yahoo! because it is the official fantasy provider of Rotoworld.

It is? I never knew that! I wonder...is there any benefit to that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant stand playing on Yahoo's dated format for any of the fantasy sports. ESPN's layout is much cleaner, there's no comparison. I'm really surprise a lot of people still play on yahoo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant stand playing on Yahoo's dated format for any of the fantasy sports. ESPN's layout is much cleaner, there's no comparison. I'm really surprise a lot of people still play on yahoo.

At least this is an opinion with some basis behind it. I couldn't ever get behind an opinion based only on how a website looks, and not the most important part - how it actually works - but at least there is reasoning behind the opinion. I can't think of one example of how Yahoo's "format" is dated though.

There is definitely a comparison, thankfully, between ESPN and Yahoo...because both websites work fantastic. That is why tons of people use Yahoo, as well as ESPN. Actually, I quite like Yahoo's clean look and don't quite understand the "dated" comment, but I guess the look of a website is mostly subjective. I have nothing against the look of ESPN's site, but I couldn't care less about how they look, just as long as they work really well and are easy to use too. While I'll grant the look of a website might be important, though very far down for me on my list of needs, wouldn't how a site works be the most important detail for anyone's league? I don't know...it would be the only vital detail for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant stand playing on Yahoo's dated format for any of the fantasy sports. ESPN's layout is much cleaner, there's no comparison. I'm really surprise a lot of people still play on yahoo.

"dated" is the perfect way to describe yahoo's layout. i like the snazzy blue for espn baseball and orange for espn basketball.

can you imbed pictures/animated gifs onto yahoo's front page yet? last year it wouldn't even let me post LINKS!

from all of the posts of the op it sounds like you're desperately trying to convince us that yahoo is better for some unknown reason. why it matters to you, i don't know..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for specific details, there's been numerous threads that have already been established with a whole range of beliefs. This thread is the most recent:

http://forums.rotowo...=299905&hl=espn

Thanks for that. Some interesting reading on first glance. A few well thought out opinions in that thread, mainly from the original poster's thoughts which is thought provoking. I was more interested in who used what site which prompted me to make the poll, but I also thought people would bring more to the table than how a site looks too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant stand playing on Yahoo's dated format for any of the fantasy sports. ESPN's layout is much cleaner, there's no comparison. I'm really surprise a lot of people still play on yahoo.

"dated" is the perfect way to describe yahoo's layout. i like the snazzy blue for espn baseball and orange for espn basketball.

can you imbed pictures/animated gifs onto yahoo's front page yet? last year it wouldn't even let me post LINKS!

from all of the posts of the op it sounds like you're desperately trying to convince us that yahoo is better for some unknown reason. why it matters to you, i don't know..

Ah, this is helpful to know. I'm not sure about previous years, but this season, you can certainly post images in Yahoo posts. So, fomr your post I can conclude that outside of Yahoo not having a "snazzy blue" design, it isn't dated.

If you took the time to actually read my posts (which I can see you haven't if you've come to the bizarre conclusion that I'm trying to convince people to use Yahoo), I've made pains to stress that I like ESPN's format and design. I've also stated that I use Yahoo. That could be why you've arrived at your erroneous opinion. Why you're concerned with why I'd convince anyone, either way, that either Yahoo or ESPN is better is beyond me too. That said, it is entertaining to continually poke holes in the "Yahoo is dated" theory which holds no weight from what I've read in this thread thus far. At the same time, if there was any truth to it, I'd be happy to switch my league to ESPN at a moment's notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for that. Some interesting reading on first glance. A few well thought out opinions in that thread, mainly from the original poster's thoughts which is thought provoking. I was more interested in who used what site which prompted me to make the poll, but I also thought people would bring more to the table than how a site looks too.

No offense, but in that thread I directed you to, the original poster actually asked questions about each platform, and specifically wondered about ESPN versus Yahoo! You simply asked if users here played in ESPN, Yahoo!, or another website entirely, and never once ask WHY it was their preference.

In player threads, users are certainly more inclined on posting with much more in-depth observations and arguments because it's relevant for fantasy purposes, and also the fact that it's fun to exchange opinions on basketball. You're going to find a lot less enthusiasm over a debate on fantasy hosting platforms, especially when you don't even specify it...I think that'll explain a lot of the underwhelming responses so far in this thread.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No offense taken (why would I?). That said, there have been some good opinions in this thread from others though I never asked for any. On that note, like those people, I wouldn't dream of posting an opinion without at least some thought out basis behind it. But that's me; everyone's different obviously. I wasn't really looking for a lot of enthusiasm nor a debate; simply some well thought out reasoning if you take the time to actually make a comment. While that has mostly been like trying to find water in a desert, there have been some, like I said, and I expect to get more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Yahoo won't let you add a chat box to the front page or any kind of graphics for that matter. Yahoo has kept their same presentation layout since I stated playing in 2005. I started playing on Yahoo first, soon switched over to ESPN bc I just like their site so much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Yahoo won't let you add a chat box to the front page or any kind of graphics for that matter. Yahoo has kept their same presentation layout since I stated playing in 2005. I started playing on Yahoo first, soon switched over to ESPN bc I just like their site so much better.

Not sure what a chat box is (message threads?), but you can add graphics easily. I can't go by previous years though, maybe you couldn't then. I don't want to be appearing like I'm convincing you to use Yahoo (oh no!), but I just wanted to state that these things are untrue. And the Yahoo website presentation is different than it was in 2005. Many things have changed like being able to attach pictures in messages and the updated way to set lineups, for example. But if you like the aesthetic of ESPN better, I can't argue with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i used yahoo for 4 years then recently switched over to espn bc it was advised by our commish. here is why i prefer espn to yahoo:

1. as noted by many people, the aesthetics are just flat out better. this isnt important to everyone, but i like it.

2. espn provides more articles and they update their staff rankings more often than yahoo ever did with their big board (which would be updated like once every few months.)

3. not sure if this has changed recently, but when i used yahoo their rankings were automatically based on 9 cat format. so even if you played 8 cat, their rankings reflected as if turnovers were included. perhaps there was a way to change that but i never found it.

4. and the biggest reason for me is HOW each site ranks their players. espn's player rater is superior to yahoo's standard numerical ranking in my opinion. i know there are other sites like bbm for this, but i like having the convenience of it all on one site. and i know a lot of the people in my league dont use bbm. So for instance with yahoo, you couldnt see how much better a fantasy player kd is than lebron, just that they were 1 and 2. Again, I dont know if this has changed since i switched over but all of these things were pretty glaring and i wish i had switched over sooner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.