Buds Board Keepers League

Thing is he creator of fanager seems to have mashed multiple sources as stated in the page - cap sourced from cg, displayed player stat off of elite prospects, and hyperlinked players stat page directly to hockeydb

They merged the best 3 hockey stat pages into one it's a fucking beauty

It is very useful and he even states it is not CapGeek and gave credit to CapGeek. It is the best we have access to!

It's alright.

bills09 wroteCOLONhttp://www.generalfanager.com

this should be stickied btw

Shep wroteCOLON

kyuss wroteCOLONmay someone that can access the archive site like I do tell if he noticed any different numbers on http://stats.nhlnumbers.com/players?year=2015 from capgeek's AVV? IIRC that is the case for some players, unfortunately

Which players on NHLNumbers.com do not have bonuses included?

I don't remember. I'm not even sure at this point, but iirc the first times I used that site I did notice a couple of players cap hit not including some bonuses (=> different number than Capgeek AAV).

We should try to pay attention during this off-season to figure out which is the route to go (i.e., the site to use for reference).

Unless we want to go by Fantrax, whose salaries however do not include bonuses.


As for the new website, it provides a different number for Jaskin then the ones given by Capgeek in the past and by nhlnumbers now:
http://www.generalfanager.com/players/1726 --> 925k
http://stats.nhlnumbers.com/player_stat ... in-dmitrij --> 894k
http://capgeek.org/blues-archive/ (this is 2013/14 Capgeek, so our number there was still "cap-hit", not "AAV") --> 894k

the discrepancy here might have something to do with sliding contracts, as for 2012/2013 nhlnumbers reports 925k

so if 894 is the correct current number like I guess, it would mean generalfanager is not always correct

That is also assuming that cap geek was always correct. That looks like the normal difference for players not meeting performance bonuses under sliding contract rules.

Lee wroteCOLONThat is also assuming that cap geek was always correct.

which to me appeared to be the case for years

wasn't it?

Lee wroteCOLONThat looks like the normal difference for players not meeting performance bonuses under sliding contract rules.

so which would be the correct number for next season?

I'm not going to get hung up on the salaries until we get closer to the season and we have to be above the floor or under the cap for sure. I think these other sites couldn't possibly be as up-to-date or accurate as CapGeek. That site seemed to be the most inside of sites of this kind. I'll still go the archived version of the site for the old contracts. Hopefully these other sites eventually get the contract info right for any new deals.

I am trying to get my shit together. Are we going to just use Cap Hit? Same numbers that show on General Fanager? Wouldnt it be the easiest to use one site and stick with it? If lack of information is the main issue with Cap Number vs Cap Hit, can we not just stick to Hit that is readily available?

Sick Ekblad banner shoalzie
I can't help but think (and i'm not calling you out in either way) that it's very kimmer-esq style... something I would've made
Probably why I liike it

It's a bit inspired by yours. I like the high saturation on the players.

CAM wroteCOLONI am trying to get my shit together. Are we going to just use Cap Hit? Same numbers that show on General Fanager? Wouldnt it be the easiest to use one site and stick with it? If lack of information is the main issue with Cap Number vs Cap Hit, can we not just stick to Hit that is readily available?

Will get back to you on this.

CAM wroteCOLONI am trying to get my shit together. Are we going to just use Cap Hit? Same numbers that show on General Fanager? Wouldnt it be the easiest to use one site and stick with it? If lack of information is the main issue with Cap Number vs Cap Hit, can we not just stick to Hit that is readily available?

Problem with General Fanager is the performance bonuses are not included in the cap hit and that is a big issue. We don't want to start using 2 or 3 sites for reference. We gotta pick one and keep it.

I've brought this up in the CC and hope we can get a decision ASAP on NHLnumbers and GF.

Sounds good Shep, thanks for the heads up.

Shep wroteCOLON

CAM wroteCOLONI am trying to get my shit together. Are we going to just use Cap Hit? Same numbers that show on General Fanager? Wouldnt it be the easiest to use one site and stick with it? If lack of information is the main issue with Cap Number vs Cap Hit, can we not just stick to Hit that is readily available?

Problem with General Fanager is the performance bonuses are not included in the cap hit and that is a big issue. We don't want to start using 2 or 3 sites for reference. We gotta pick one and keep it.

I've brought this up in the CC and hope we can get a decision ASAP on NHLnumbers and GF.

If you bring up the player's pages it has the AAV which includes the bonuses unless I am missing something.

Bruyns wroteCOLON

Shep wroteCOLON

CAM wroteCOLONI am trying to get my shit together. Are we going to just use Cap Hit? Same numbers that show on General Fanager? Wouldnt it be the easiest to use one site and stick with it? If lack of information is the main issue with Cap Number vs Cap Hit, can we not just stick to Hit that is readily available?

Problem with General Fanager is the performance bonuses are not included in the cap hit and that is a big issue. We don't want to start using 2 or 3 sites for reference. We gotta pick one and keep it.

I've brought this up in the CC and hope we can get a decision ASAP on NHLnumbers and GF.

If you bring up the player's pages it has the AAV which includes the bonuses unless I am missing something.

Yea that's what I've been using. Checked the AAV in comparison to my capgeek recorded numbers and they matched.

Bruyns wroteCOLON

Shep wroteCOLON

CAM wroteCOLONI am trying to get my shit together. Are we going to just use Cap Hit? Same numbers that show on General Fanager? Wouldnt it be the easiest to use one site and stick with it? If lack of information is the main issue with Cap Number vs Cap Hit, can we not just stick to Hit that is readily available?

Problem with General Fanager is the performance bonuses are not included in the cap hit and that is a big issue. We don't want to start using 2 or 3 sites for reference. We gotta pick one and keep it.

I've brought this up in the CC and hope we can get a decision ASAP on NHLnumbers and GF.

If you bring up the player's pages it has the AAV which includes the bonuses unless I am missing something.

You are correct. My bad.

Gf ftw

as said inside CC, I don't think we actually need to make an immediate decision.. as we are far and away from submission.

So we should spend some time monitoring the websites to see which is correct before picking one imo.

http://www.hockeyscap.com

Better than generalfanager?