Re: but is it true?

Quote
CeeZar

Quote
zn
One good argument for how it works is, teams spend up to 60% of their cap on 10 high contract players. ....

More of a myth than a "good argument".

Which team spends 60% of their cap on just 10 players? None that I could find, but I didn't check each team. Perhaps you can provide some evidence for this mythical claim...

[www.spotrac.com]

This discussion has gone on for quite a while. The key article about it is in fact based on research. They arrived at the 60% on 10 number by looking at contracts. [www.sbnation.com] Many of us have discussed this here and elsewhere several times in several discussions over the months and people have dived into the numbers. So while you may dispute it, it's not "myth."

I don't use spotrac, I use over the cap dot com.

The cap is 188 M. 60% of that is just over 112 M. I pulled up a team--Carolina (random choice)--and their top 10 contracts total around 112.4 M. That's eerily dead on so I looked at Seattle. Their top 10 players come in at around 107 M. Close enough.

Close enough counts...and here's why. This is from Connelly's article:

Quote

As it turns out, a lot of the best teams play a pretty dangerous game: the more you spend on your top 10 salaries, the better your team is going to be ... right up until you’ve spent too much. The goal is apparently to get as close as possible to 60 percent without going over. If you get that ratio right and keep the right players healthy — obviously the former is a little bit more in your control than the latter — you have passed the roster balance test.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/08/2019 06:01PM by zn.