Folau turns back on Eels to play rugby union

[Gary Gutful]

That sort of happened to me once. Although I wasn't browsing this website at the time.

You weren't searching for pictures of Bros were you or am I confusing you with someone else? :lol:

 

[Gary Gutful]

I don't see you asking for an example of an average player earning $250k. bartman would f**king splinter if he saw you carrying on like that.

But if you're trying to pick a hole in my argument you first need to get yourself up to speed on this: http://www.darwinsfinance.com/median-mean-definition/

Bear in mind I used the term 'average' in place of both 'mean' and 'median' (and 'mode' too considering the amount of players likely to be on minimum salary). This is because I wanted low achievers like yourself to be able to understand my point.

Silly me.

Did anyone else read the linked web page? I did but personally I thought it was a bit average. :sarcasm:

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Now you're just being median.

 

[Sphagnum]

The Eels forums: Where residents are just crazy enough to think that they're punny.

 

[emjaycee]

So if you have a salary cap of $4.5m shared among your top '25' with 3 or 4 marquee players and 4 or 5 rookies on minimum wage you can easily have an "average" player earning less then the average wage.
Eg:
Salary
$600,000
$550,000
$400,000
$300,000
$300,000
$280,000
$250,000
$220,000
$200,000
$180,000
$150,000
$120,000
$105,000
$100,000
$90,000
$80,000
$80,000
$80,000
$65,000
$65,000
$65,000
$55,000
$55,000
$55,000
$55,000
$4,500,000 (Total Cap)

Mean Average: $180,000
Median Average: $105,000
Mode Average: $55,000

The subjectivity comes in when you look at defining WHO is an average player.
Is Chase Blair or Tim Mannah or Ben Roberts an AVERAGE player?

 

[Gary Gutful]

So if you have a salary cap of $4.5m shared among your top '25' with 3 or 4 marquee players and 4 or 5 rookies on minimum wage you can easily have an "average" player earning less then the average wage.
Eg:
Salary
$600,000
$550,000
$400,000
$300,000
$300,000
$280,000
$250,000
$220,000
$200,000
$180,000
$150,000
$120,000
$105,000
$100,000
$90,000
$80,000
$80,000
$80,000
$65,000
$65,000
$65,000
$55,000
$55,000
$55,000
$55,000
$4,500,000 (Total Cap)

Mean Average: $180,000
Median Average: $105,000
Mode Average: $55,000

The subjectivity comes in when you look at defining WHO is an average player.
Is Chase Blair or Tim Mannah or Ben Roberts an AVERAGE player?

I wouldn't want to nominate who an average player is as I think that would just be median.

 

[Bigfella]

Now you're just being median.

I think you both were.

I guess it makes you comediens?

 

[Gary Gutful]

I think you both were.

I guess it makes you comediens?

I went to the butchers the other day and bet him 50 quid that he couldn't reach the meat off the top shelf. He said, "No, the steaks are too high."

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You weren't searching for pictures of Bros were you or am I confusing you with someone else? :lol:

Actually I have a folder full of them on my hard drive so the joke's on you.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Actually I have a folder full of them on my hard drive so the joke's on you.

:lol:

Filed under 'B' next to Bieber.

 

[born an eel]

I believe one of these blokes had a gutful, Gary.

when did you and Suity go to the fancy dress party?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

bartman initially wanted to come along and play the ball, the man and whatever he could get. But you know what they say.. Bros before hos.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

It comes down to this:

If we had 6 players on $250k in 2010 then they'd take the whole raise to $5m in 2013, if the statement that $250k = $400k is correct.

If we had anyone higher than $250k then you'd need to make a case for them not receiving any raise at all. This is the opposite of what would happen as they would receive larger raises than those below them. This would then mean we'd need less players on $250k so that they can each get the raise to $400k to make the statement true.

Then we have the minimum contract, a rise in which would eat into any of the above.

Mean/median/average etc is just playing semantics in order to avoid the point, which is that there is no way that $250k in 2010 = $400k in 2013. Any suggestion that this is the case is ludicrous.

 

[eels81236]

Have you factored in the CPI? There has to be a couple of hundred bucks right there.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Whoever reckoned the $250K is now worth $400K is a f**king moron.

 

[Gronk]

WTF is going on ?

This link says that Leeds signed Joel Moon after missing out on Willie Tonga.

I also saw on a Leeds forum that Wtonga was only ever to be going to Leeds on a 1 year loan. CBF'd finding the link sorry.

 

[Noise]

Dragons need a center, wonder if they will take him off our hands....

 

[Poupou Escobar]

It comes down to this:

If we had 6 players on $250k in 2010 then they'd take the whole raise to $5m in 2013, if the statement that $250k = $400k is correct.

I doubt more than 5 or 6 players at each club will see any change to their value, to be honest. A rise in the minimum salary will add a few more but most of the players at the middle and bottom end of the talent spectrum will see no change. As you rightly point out, the top earners will suck up all the increase in the salary cap.

At the moment the cap increase will be all about keeping the stars in the game (or bringing them back - Folau, SBW). Everyone else can get f**ked - they're not going anywhere so there's no need to pander to them just yet. For this reason I would be surprised if there was any change to the minimum salary in the current cap increase.

I also reckon $250k would place a player in that top 5 or 6 earners at most clubs. Given two blokes on half a million dollars or more (or three on $400k+), that's a quarter of the (2012) cap tied up in two or three players.

If we had anyone higher than $250k then you'd need to make a case for them not receiving any raise at all. This is the opposite of what would happen as they would receive larger raises than those below them. This would then mean we'd need less players on $250k so that they can each get the raise to $400k to make the statement true.

Then we have the minimum contract, a rise in which would eat into any of the above.

Mean/median/average etc is just playing semantics in order to avoid the point, which is that there is no way that $250k in 2010 = $400k in 2013. Any suggestion that this is the case is ludicrous.

I reckon $250k in 2010 is more like $350k in 2013. That's why I said it was

Close to the truth.

when ME suggested $250k (then) = $400k (now).

$250k is not a middle of the road earner. A player on $250k should be one of the top five or so players at a club. Look at emjaycee's breakdown:

So if you have a salary cap of $4.5m shared among your top '25' with 3 or 4 marquee players and 4 or 5 rookies on minimum wage you can easily have an "average" player earning less then the average wage.
Eg:
Salary
$600,000
$550,000
$400,000
$300,000
$300,000
$280,000
$250,000
$220,000
$200,000
$180,000
$150,000
$120,000
$105,000
$100,000
$90,000
$80,000
$80,000
$80,000
$65,000
$65,000
$65,000
$55,000
$55,000
$55,000
$55,000
$4,500,000 (Total Cap)

Mean Average: $180,000
Median Average: $105,000
Mode Average: $55,000

The subjectivity comes in when you look at defining WHO is an average player.
Is Chase Blair or Tim Mannah or Ben Roberts an AVERAGE player?

Salary distribution modelling in wider society suggests that's pretty close to the money. I would place the median down closer to $90k.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Good post Poupou.

 

[strider]

Good post Poupou.

can you summarise it for me ... i'm not in the mood to read much this evening