Player Review Phase 3 - Salaries Topic

seble
Posts: 878 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 175
Prospect
I've updated the spreadsheet again. 

- Rebounding weight has been increased

- After Qistat's excellent point about offense, I've changed how offensive value is calculated to combine efficiency and volume into something that makes more sense.  You'll see high volume, low efficiency guys drop from where they were last time.

- I tried to reduce the guys on the lower end of the minutes scale a bit

One thing I noticed while looking at Wilt is that the old formula did not factor in FT%.  That's part of the reason he has dropped a bit, because the new formula uses True Shooting%, which does factor in FT efficiency.

Let me know what you think.
8/26/2010 4:06 PM
slymonium
Posts: 4809 (0)
Hall of Famer
284 30 2
Prospect
Quick first glance- I like what I see so far.
8/26/2010 4:28 PM
ashamael
Posts: 12647 (1)
Hall of Famer
532 19
All Star
I'm at work so I haven't had a chance to look at the new spreadsheet.

One thing I think you should be careful with TS% affecting salaries too much as it heavily uses Free Throws... guys like 87-88 Barkley have extremely high TS%, and that's in part to his 951 FTAs that he shot decently from.  09-10 Kevin Durant is another great example of this...

In this sim, none of the high FTA players come close to approaching their RL numbers when it comes to FTA.  So players who shot much less FTAs (like Peja) end up a better value.  AND players who had a ton of ftas but shot poorly (like Wilt, Shaq, Howard) will have their TS% actually come down, thus bringing down their salary when again, they won't reach that number, so their TS% will be much higher in the sim than IRL.  Again, a much better bargain.

More FTAs, better FT% = bad bargain
More FTAs, worse FT% = good bargain
Less FTAs, better FT% = good bargain

That probably should not be the way it is. 

8/26/2010 4:31 PM
seble
Posts: 878 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 175
Prospect
Most often the reason that FTA come up short is because of team composition, both yours and the opponents.  Individual salaries can't reflect anything related to that.
8/26/2010 4:46 PM
seble
Posts: 878 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 175
Prospect
On a related note, I mentioned once that fouls are not being factored in.  Do you guys think it's necessary to do that?
8/26/2010 4:47 PM
ashamael
Posts: 12647 (1)
Hall of Famer
532 19
All Star
Posted by seble on 8/26/2010 4:46:00 PM (view original):
Most often the reason that FTA come up short is because of team composition, both yours and the opponents.  Individual salaries can't reflect anything related to that.
I've experimented a lot with this.  The only way to get everyone on your team to achieve their RL ftas is to severely gimp your usage, causing more turnovers.  But whatever.
8/26/2010 4:53 PM
dh555
Posts: 8537 (8)
Hall of Famer
453
Veteran
moses peja barros nash....all higher salaries....love it


i have one huge complaint though that anyone who actually plays the game will agree on....you HAVE to raise the price for guys who do nothing but dominate the glass...guys like rodman, ben wallace, jayson and jerome williams, landsberger etc......they get used on every team because rebounding is always the #1 priority and they are bargains because they dont score.....i didnt look at all of these types but 93-94 rodman dropped to 6.9 so im guessing its more of the same for the others....91-92 rodman did go up to 9.1 but really he should be 10+ since hes the most popular player in the game
8/26/2010 4:54 PM
eleibowitz
Posts: 3680 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 289 10 4 15
Prospect

The salaries are looking good, 05-06 Nash at $7.16m, 03-04 Peja at $8.56m, 05-06 Ray Allen at $7.5m , 78-79 Moses at $10.67m and 91-92 Rodman at $9.17m.  Out of curiousity how much on average did salaries go up?

8/26/2010 4:55 PM
ashamael
Posts: 12647 (1)
Hall of Famer
532 19
All Star
Posted by seble on 8/26/2010 4:47:00 PM (view original):
On a related note, I mentioned once that fouls are not being factored in.  Do you guys think it's necessary to do that?
Hmmm.

I think fouling tendency should be reflected in salary IF it's normalized for pace.  Which I don't know if it is or not.  If it is normalized for pace, then the following should be considered.

A guy that plays 3700 minutes and only fouls 150 times
vs
A guy that plays 1800 minute and fouls 320 times.

You'd think that would play in there somewhere - but, again, only if fouls are normalized for pace.
8/26/2010 4:56 PM
seble
Posts: 878 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 175
Prospect
Posted by eleibowitz on 8/26/2010 4:55:00 PM (view original):

The salaries are looking good, 05-06 Nash at $7.16m, 03-04 Peja at $8.56m, 05-06 Ray Allen at $7.5m , 78-79 Moses at $10.67m and 91-92 Rodman at $9.17m.  Out of curiousity how much on average did salaries go up?

Average currently is $2,519,739 and in the latest spreadsheet it's $3,033,055.

8/26/2010 5:04 PM
seble
Posts: 878 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 175
Prospect
Posted by dh555 on 8/26/2010 4:54:00 PM (view original):
moses peja barros nash....all higher salaries....love it


i have one huge complaint though that anyone who actually plays the game will agree on....you HAVE to raise the price for guys who do nothing but dominate the glass...guys like rodman, ben wallace, jayson and jerome williams, landsberger etc......they get used on every team because rebounding is always the #1 priority and they are bargains because they dont score.....i didnt look at all of these types but 93-94 rodman dropped to 6.9 so im guessing its more of the same for the others....91-92 rodman did go up to 9.1 but really he should be 10+ since hes the most popular player in the game
There's really no logical way to do that without also raising the guys that are good rebounders and do other things.
8/26/2010 5:05 PM
eleibowitz
Posts: 3680 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 289 10 4 15
Prospect
Also how is TS% calcuated?  Is that the same as eFG%? Or is that just part of the logic of the SIM?
8/26/2010 5:09 PM
seble
Posts: 878 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 175
Prospect
Posted by eleibowitz on 8/26/2010 5:09:00 PM (view original):
Also how is TS% calcuated?  Is that the same as eFG%? Or is that just part of the logic of the SIM?
PTS / (2 * (FGA + 0.44 * FTA))
8/26/2010 5:17 PM
badja
Posts: 1342 (0)
All Star
42 1
Prospect
Posted by seble on 8/26/2010 4:47:00 PM (view original):
On a related note, I mentioned once that fouls are not being factored in.  Do you guys think it's necessary to do that?
What do you mean by not factored in?  I would love to see fouls normalized as many of the 80's players are unusable.  Fouls are very important as are FT's.
8/26/2010 5:43 PM
ncmusician_7
Posts: 1774 (0)
Hall of Famer
70 143 12 18
All Star
Posted by seble on 8/26/2010 4:47:00 PM (view original):
On a related note, I mentioned once that fouls are not being factored in.  Do you guys think it's necessary to do that?
I think they should affect salary a little bit (but have less weight on that attribute than the other ones).  If everything else is equal, a player who fouls once per 15 minutes is worth slightly more than one who fouls once per 10 minutes.
8/26/2010 5:45 PM
123 Next ▸
Player Review Phase 3 - Salaries Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.