well i agree it says 10. however there is some evidence of a curvilinear between wins and percent of the salary cap on 10 players in that the wins go up until you hit that 60 percent mark where it appears that teams that spend 60+ on 10 players tend to be top heavy.
Pct. Teams Avg. wins
0-39% 13 4.8
40-43% 30 6.4
44-47% 51 8.0
48-51% 46 8.3
52-55% 50 8.9
56-59% 26 9.260+% 8 5.5
conversely the table you provide shows a general trend that a higher percent of the cap spent on 10 players results in more wins. There is noting to suggest that spending more on the top 10 is detrimental. Moreover, while you note the average spent by 13-15 win teams is 52.5, there is no standard deviation or range provided so we cant tell the upper and lower limits of the percent spent. It s possible, even likely given the previous table that the confidence interval extends up to 59. Finally, the statistical significance between between wins and percent of the salary cap on 10 players is anything but clear as the necessary information needed to calculated significance is not provided. You cant just assume no significance.
Quote
CeeZar
He advocates spending up to 60% on only 9 players. Which means the 10th takes it over 60%. Which according the referenced article historically teams that do that average 5.5 wins.
Pretty clear.
It is also clear from that article that there is little statistical significance once you get above 52% and really not much difference down to 48%.
And there is no evidence provided in the article that "good teams" spend up to 60%.
Teams (2011-17)
Wins Teams Pct. of cap occupied by top 10
13-15 16 52.5
12 17 50.5
11 21 50.3
10 22 51.8
9 24 49.1
8 28 49.5
7 26 47.9
6 20 47.4
5 14 45.7
4 17 46.6
0-3 19 47.5
