Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[pawsandclaws1]

I wonder what today will bring

Souths asking for a long deal for Stefano and Seyfarth /

 

[finnzo]

I wonder what today will bring

Souths asking for a long deal for Stefano and Seyfarth /

Well they can shove that up there behinds haha they can have packer haha

 

[Fletch]

$327k is the median of the salary cap, but not necessarily the average salary. Without accurate salary figures it’s difficult to determine the average as it depends on how many players on a roster are earning overs and unders and by what margins. I’m guessing the average salary would be lower than $327k considering marquee players take up large portions of the cap - it would be interesting to know…

No I'm pretty sure you are not correct. Assuming the club spends 100% of its salary cap (I think they have to spent at minimum 90%?) then the average salary is, by definition, $9.8M divided by 30, for each and every club. We know these parameters to be set and not dependent on an individual allocation of funds.

The median is actually the calculation that is impacted by significant individual salaries, because it's the "middle value" of the set.

So for instance, an imaginary pool of 10 players
1, 1, 1, 1, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.2, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.5, average = 0.64
1, 0.9, 0.9, 0.9, 0.7, 0.6, 0.5, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.7, average = 0.64

Note how the median is skewed in the first set because of the uneven distribution of funds, even though the top 4 players are on almost the same money.


I have to reacquaint myself with the ‘4 averages’: mean, median, mode and range.

I think what I’m searching for is an average that’s closer to the ‘mode’ (data that occurs the most) - rather than the mean or median averages.

To get the mode average don’t we need to eliminate the data from the bell curve that ‘skews’ - i.e. the high earners and those on the minimum wage, and then calculate the average from what’s remaining...?

To me the mode average would be interesting in relation to the salary cap, but it’s difficult to attain unless you have the data, plus you then need to apply discretion to determine how much data you eliminate - and where you apply that discretion will give you different results.

Ahh... footballers make good money is the point of it all, whatever the mathematical mechanism to get there. Yes many fall by the wayside but so does the general public in many endeavours big and small. So my point being - sure footballers want to make as much money as possible with their opportunities, but who doesn't? And most folks don't get a shot at several hundred thousand p.a.

Your original point is valid and I agree with you. I went off on a tangent, and in hindsight I probably should have pointed that out from the outset.

 

[bradex]

On my Insta, SMH reporting that Deouhi will sign with the Roisters

 

[Fletch]

$327k is the median of the salary cap, but not necessarily the average salary. Without accurate salary figures it’s difficult to determine the average as it depends on how many players on a roster are earning overs and unders and by what margins. I’m guessing the average salary would be lower than $327k considering marquee players take up large portions of the cap - it would be interesting to know…

No I'm pretty sure you are not correct. Assuming the club spends 100% of its salary cap (I think they have to spent at minimum 90%?) then the average salary is, by definition, $9.8M divided by 30, for each and every club. We know these parameters to be set and not dependent on an individual allocation of funds.

The median is actually the calculation that is impacted by significant individual salaries, because it's the "middle value" of the set.

So for instance, an imaginary pool of 10 players
1, 1, 1, 1, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.2, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.5, average = 0.64
1, 0.9, 0.9, 0.9, 0.7, 0.6, 0.5, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.7, average = 0.64

Note how the median is skewed in the first set because of the uneven distribution of funds, even though the top 4 players are on almost the same money.


I have to reacquaint myself with the ‘4 averages’: mean, median, mode and range.

I think what I’m searching for is an average that’s closer to the ‘mode’ (data that occurs the most) - rather than the mean or median averages.

To get the mode average don’t we need to eliminate the data from the bell curve that ‘skews’ - i.e. the high earners and those on the minimum wage, and then calculate the average from what’s remaining...?

To me the mode average would be interesting in relation to the salary cap, but it’s difficult to attain unless you have the data, plus you then need to apply discretion to determine how much data you eliminate - and where you apply that discretion will give you different results.

**Mean** is the average i.e add all numbers together and divide by the amount of numbers.

**Median** is the middle i.e list all the numbers in order and the number in the middle is the median.

**Mode** is the number that occurs the most i.e list all the numbers and the number that appears the most is the mode.

**Range** is the difference between the lowest and highest number.

So I am not sure what you are trying to say.

Ultimately I’m trying to understand how clubs structure their salary cap. This might be a better way of explaining it (I think this is how the Sharks do it):

If a club spends half of their cap $4.9m on 6 elite players at an average of $816k each.

Then the other $4.9m of the cap is spread over the remaining 24 players at an average of $204k each.

 

[weststigers]

On my Insta, SMH reporting that Deouhi will sign with the Roisters

Good...we dodged a bullet if true.

 

[Spud_Murphy]

I'm liking the WT/Storm trade proposal. It will be interesting how the NRL responds to this arrangement, particularly from a cap perspective. I.e does Momo's salary count towards the Storms cap or the Tigers cap?


Looks like the NRL has approved the swap deal, which is unusual for Toddy to help us.
Maybe the NRL thought that they might be helping the Storm more than helping us.

Lol no doubt, if it had have been us and Canterbury it probably wouldn't be allowed ?

 

[Spud_Murphy]

I wonder what today will bring

Roosters sign Douehi!

 

[NT_Tiger]

This is like a game of tennis.

 

[bathursttiger1]

$327k is the median of the salary cap, but not necessarily the average salary. Without accurate salary figures it’s difficult to determine the average as it depends on how many players on a roster are earning overs and unders and by what margins. I’m guessing the average salary would be lower than $327k considering marquee players take up large portions of the cap - it would be interesting to know…

No I'm pretty sure you are not correct. Assuming the club spends 100% of its salary cap (I think they have to spent at minimum 90%?) then the average salary is, by definition, $9.8M divided by 30, for each and every club. We know these parameters to be set and not dependent on an individual allocation of funds.

The median is actually the calculation that is impacted by significant individual salaries, because it's the "middle value" of the set.

So for instance, an imaginary pool of 10 players
1, 1, 1, 1, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.2, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.5, average = 0.64
1, 0.9, 0.9, 0.9, 0.7, 0.6, 0.5, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.7, average = 0.64

Note how the median is skewed in the first set because of the uneven distribution of funds, even though the top 4 players are on almost the same money.


I have to reacquaint myself with the ‘4 averages’: mean, median, mode and range.

I think what I’m searching for is an average that’s closer to the ‘mode’ (data that occurs the most) - rather than the mean or median averages.

To get the mode average don’t we need to eliminate the data from the bell curve that ‘skews’ - i.e. the high earners and those on the minimum wage, and then calculate the average from what’s remaining...?

To me the mode average would be interesting in relation to the salary cap, but it’s difficult to attain unless you have the data, plus you then need to apply discretion to determine how much data you eliminate - and where you apply that discretion will give you different results.

**Mean** is the average i.e add all numbers together and divide by the amount of numbers.

**Median** is the middle i.e list all the numbers in order and the number in the middle is the median.

**Mode** is the number that occurs the most i.e list all the numbers and the number that appears the most is the mode.

**Range** is the difference between the lowest and highest number.

So I am not sure what you are trying to say.


Ultimately I’m trying to understand how clubs structure their salary cap. This might be a better way of explaining it (I think this is how the Sharks do it):

If a club spends half of their cap $4.9m on 6 elite players at an average of $816k each.

Then the other $4.9m of the cap is spread over the remaining 24 players at an average of $204k each.

Plus free Peptides.

 

[sleeve]

Can someone help me here? Tigers still have approx 1 mil .Could sign Douie andJAC now if possible. Development players Zini and Simkins etc eligible to play mid season? Tigers discard 5 players at end of 2020 contracts and have another 1 mill approx to sign players after november. Please advise if i am on the right track.

 

[Demps]

said

Dont speak too soon....

 

[Aubanon]

Speaking to a staff member from the club yesterday (Non recruitment roll), said there wasnt any chatter regarding AD.

 

[sleeve]

Sorry Demps,not suggesting we get one or both, it might be AJ or another. But is the scenarios possible?

 

[Geo]

$327k is the median of the salary cap, but not necessarily the average salary. Without accurate salary figures it’s difficult to determine the average as it depends on how many players on a roster are earning overs and unders and by what margins. I’m guessing the average salary would be lower than $327k considering marquee players take up large portions of the cap - it would be interesting to know…

No I'm pretty sure you are not correct. Assuming the club spends 100% of its salary cap (I think they have to spent at minimum 90%?) then the average salary is, by definition, $9.8M divided by 30, for each and every club. We know these parameters to be set and not dependent on an individual allocation of funds.

The median is actually the calculation that is impacted by significant individual salaries, because it's the "middle value" of the set.

So for instance, an imaginary pool of 10 players
1, 1, 1, 1, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.2, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.5, average = 0.64
1, 0.9, 0.9, 0.9, 0.7, 0.6, 0.5, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.7, average = 0.64

Note how the median is skewed in the first set because of the uneven distribution of funds, even though the top 4 players are on almost the same money.


I have to reacquaint myself with the ‘4 averages’: mean, median, mode and range.

I think what I’m searching for is an average that’s closer to the ‘mode’ (data that occurs the most) - rather than the mean or median averages.

To get the mode average don’t we need to eliminate the data from the bell curve that ‘skews’ - i.e. the high earners and those on the minimum wage, and then calculate the average from what’s remaining...?

To me the mode average would be interesting in relation to the salary cap, but it’s difficult to attain unless you have the data, plus you then need to apply discretion to determine how much data you eliminate - and where you apply that discretion will give you different results.

**Mean** is the average i.e add all numbers together and divide by the amount of numbers.

**Median** is the middle i.e list all the numbers in order and the number in the middle is the median.

**Mode** is the number that occurs the most i.e list all the numbers and the number that appears the most is the mode.

**Range** is the difference between the lowest and highest number.

So I am not sure what you are trying to say.

And Josh Dugan is an outlier ..which for those who really wanted to know.....is any data point more than 1.5 interquartile ranges (IQRs) below the first quartile or above the third quartile.

Defo above

 

[Tcat]

I wonder what today will bring

Roosters sign Douehi!

Ill be happy if he signs as he has that x factor, but won't be as pee'd off as I was with LM if we miss out on him.

 

[Tcat]

Speaking to a staff member from the club yesterday (Non recruitment roll), said there wasnt any chatter regarding AD.

Maybe we learnt a harsh lesson a few weeks ago. Say nothing regarding any signings, you will either come out looking great if you land someone great and equally not look stupid if you miss out (looking desperate).

 

[bathursttiger1]

$327k is the median of the salary cap, but not necessarily the average salary. Without accurate salary figures it’s difficult to determine the average as it depends on how many players on a roster are earning overs and unders and by what margins. I’m guessing the average salary would be lower than $327k considering marquee players take up large portions of the cap - it would be interesting to know…

No I'm pretty sure you are not correct. Assuming the club spends 100% of its salary cap (I think they have to spent at minimum 90%?) then the average salary is, by definition, $9.8M divided by 30, for each and every club. We know these parameters to be set and not dependent on an individual allocation of funds.

The median is actually the calculation that is impacted by significant individual salaries, because it's the "middle value" of the set.

So for instance, an imaginary pool of 10 players
1, 1, 1, 1, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.2, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.5, average = 0.64
1, 0.9, 0.9, 0.9, 0.7, 0.6, 0.5, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2 --N = 10, sum = 6.4, median = 0.7, average = 0.64

Note how the median is skewed in the first set because of the uneven distribution of funds, even though the top 4 players are on almost the same money.


I have to reacquaint myself with the ‘4 averages’: mean, median, mode and range.

I think what I’m searching for is an average that’s closer to the ‘mode’ (data that occurs the most) - rather than the mean or median averages.

To get the mode average don’t we need to eliminate the data from the bell curve that ‘skews’ - i.e. the high earners and those on the minimum wage, and then calculate the average from what’s remaining...?

To me the mode average would be interesting in relation to the salary cap, but it’s difficult to attain unless you have the data, plus you then need to apply discretion to determine how much data you eliminate - and where you apply that discretion will give you different results.

**Mean** is the average i.e add all numbers together and divide by the amount of numbers.

**Median** is the middle i.e list all the numbers in order and the number in the middle is the median.

**Mode** is the number that occurs the most i.e list all the numbers and the number that appears the most is the mode.

**Range** is the difference between the lowest and highest number.

So I am not sure what you are trying to say.

And Josh Dugan is an outlier ..which for those who really wanted to know.....is any data point more than 1.5 interquartile ranges (IQRs) below the first quartile or above the third quartile.

Defo above

Another school teacher?

 

[Curly_Tiger]

Can someone help me here? Tigers still have approx 1 mil .Could sign Douie andJAC now if possible. Development players Zini and Simkins etc eligible to play mid season? Tigers discard 5 players at end of 2020 contracts and have another 1 mill approx to sign players after november. Please advise if i am on the right track.

By my estimates we have around $700k left for our final two spots, see my thread for full detail albeit estimated

Haven't factored in any Momo for Grant shenanigans as I don't know how that would work

 

[Elderslie_Tiger]

https://www.weststigers.com.au/news/2020/01/29/wests-tigers-appoint-ron-griffiths-as-coaching-assistant/