Another Proposed wage structure...

[Sriram k]

I tried a variety of formulas for wages today and found tht as Marc had said 1 lenier formula just couldnt do the trick! I added a bit of if - then statements and got a somewht fair formula going.
The formula only depends on stats of players.Form, Age or experience is not taken into account
Attached is the wages the formula generated for all teams.

I propose a slight advantage to higher division teams in terms of the money alloted.This would not cause the so called unevenness because all teams in the same division do get the same amount of money hence have squads of almost the same strength.If the money alloted to all teams is same then it could cause a bit of monotony with absolutely no difference between a 1st division and 5 th division team.

Div 1 four day team 600k.
Div 1 one day team 600k.
Div 2 four day team 575k.
Div 2 one day team 575k.
Div 3 four day team 550k.
Div 3 one day team 550k.
Div 4 four day team 525k.
Div 4 one day team 525k.
Div 5 four day team 500k.
Div 5 one day team 500k.

Winnings could be as follows :
Div 1 four day winners-100k
Div 1 one day winners-100k
Div 2 four day winners-90k
Div 2 one day winners-90k
Div 3 four day winners-80k
Div 3 one day winners-80k
Div 4 four day winners-70k
Div 4 one day winners-70k
Div 5 four day winners-60k
Div 5 one day winners-60k

Div 1 four day runnersup-50k
Div 1 one day runnersup-50k
Div 2 four day runnersup-45k
Div 2 one day runnersup-45k
Div 3 four day runnersup-40k
Div 3 one day runnersup-40k
Div 4 four day runnersup-35k
Div 4 one day runnersup-35k
Div 5 four day runnersup-30k
Div 5 one day runnersup-30k

Vb cup winner-100k
Vb cup runnersup-50k

If anyone is interested then Ill copy paste the whole code of wage generation.
And before Aditya curses me for taking all the credit this was partly thought up by him as well...!!

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I like this system purely because Auckland (my team) has a relatively low payroll.

Seriously, I'd like to know how it's calculated (ie formula) before I comment.

 

[Rich2001]

The only thing I really noticed was I felt that the bowlers were graded to high, I mean an avg bowler in my side who hasn't played all season was about 15k more than my star batsman of the season who's overall avg 52 and 34 and a season avg of 102.

I spoke to Sriram about it and he felt that bowlers were more important as you need 20 wickets to win a match, however without runs your nothing either.

 

[deckard]

I dont think the formula is that accurate as my cheapest bowler is Kirby on 57k who is outstanding in one form but ordinary in the other. But i would consider him one of my most important and put him above nearly all of the bowlers above him based on salaries. It just doesnt seem right.

 

[Sriram k]

ok I adjusted the algorithm again to favour bowlers a bit more and uploaded the file again.
I know we arent there as yet but a bit of adjustment here and there should get us there....

Heres the complete algorithm...:

sal1 = 0.76 * 4 day Batting_Avg

If 4 day Batting_Avg > 45 Then sal1 = sal1 * 1.4 ( since batsmen with a great average wud demand a little more!)

sal2 = 0.95 * Batting_Avg_1d

If Batting_Avg_1d > 40 Then sal2 = sal2 * 1.4

sal3 = 61.42 - 0.857 * 4 day Bowling_sr

If 4 day Bowling_sr < 50 Then sal3 = sal3 * 1.4

sal4 = 56.67 - 0.8333 * Bowling_sr_1d

If Bowling_sr_1d < 30 Then sal3 = sal3 * 1.4

sal5 = 10.64 - 0.0909 * 4 day Bowling_econ

sal6 = + 15 - 0.1667 * Bowling_econ_1d

sal = (sal1 + sal2 + sal3 + sal4 + sal5 + sal6) / 1.3)



Sriram

 

[Rich2001]

Yeah all the players are worked out on a combination of both forms of the game so a better player in both forms will be more valuble, I guess it's an advantage for you though as a fantastic bowler is so cheap

 

[Rich2001]

Sriram upload the second file with a different name from the first as only the orginal will work.

ok I adjusted the algorithm again to favour bowlers a bit more and uploaded the file again.

Um my point was they were already favoured with the orginal, so batsman needed a slight teak or the bowlers should be lowered slighty - Or did you just miss type and mean batsman?

 

[Sriram k]

Sriram upload the second file with a different name from the first as only the orginal will work.



Um my point was they were already favoured with the orginal, so batsman needed a slight teak or the bowlers should be lowered slighty - Or did you just miss type and mean batsman?

Typo...sorry :duh:

Hmm..I hope I didnt overdo it..I mean didnt get the bats all the way up n the bowlers down!!

Sriram

 

[Sriram k]

since the old attachment doesnt seem to work properly Im posting it again....

 

[The Argonaut]

It's a pretty complicated formula. I'll post some more on mine tomorrow. The order of the players seems to be similar but the difference between them is much less. For example the top players will earn $70k while the good players earn $50k and the ordinary around the $40k mark.

I still think that the overs per match a bowler bowls needs to be taken into account somewhere. Part time bowlers will be ranked at the same level as full time. For example, a guy bowls 30 overs per game with a strike rate of 45 will have the same salary as one who bowls 20 overs per game with the same strike rate.

 

[nibbs]

According to that formula the crappest players in WCC are N Pillion of Northern Districts and M Wallace of Mashonaland.

 

[age_master]

number of matches i beliee affects a player - i think this should be incprporatedinto any formula

 

[marc71178]

Nice to know these formulae are so easy to work out with all the various different factors needing to be considered!

 

[aditya]

.I still think that the overs per match a bowler bowls needs to be taken into account somewhere. Part time bowlers will be ranked at the same level as full time. For example, a guy bowls 30 overs per game with a strike rate of 45 will have the same salary as one who bowls 20 overs per game with the same strike rate.

I think it has been taken into account.A bowler who bowls less than 4 overs in od does not cost for his bowling.

 

[age_master]

i think the money needds to be lowered slightly and/or the wages for players raised slightly as well, so we will see a little bit of player movement

 

[aditya]

i think the money needds to be lowered slightly and/or the wages for players raised slightly as well, so we will see a little bit of player movement

You have to see equally for all the divisions.If the money is lowered then it will be difficult to retain 16 players with that amount.We had thought abt it and then came to conclusion that 1200k for div 1 will be needed so that they can buy 16 players with it.If the money will be lowered SA will be very much affected as they then will not have enough money to spend in the draft period after retaining their 10 players.My total is also very high but with M Attapatu and G Richards retiring it can be managed.

 

[aditya]

I dont think the formula is that accurate as my cheapest bowler is Kirby on 57k who is outstanding in one form but ordinary in the other. But i would consider him one of my most important and put him above nearly all of the bowlers above him based on salaries. It just doesnt seem right.

The reason for Kirby salary is he just bowls exceptionally in one form and doesn't bat at all.So there is not much money for his bowling in one day and for batting.Almost the full amount is for his four day bowling.

 

[age_master]

You have to see equally for all the divisions.If the money is lowered then it will be difficult to retain 16 players with that amount.We had thought abt it and then came to conclusion that 1200k for div 1 will be needed so that they can buy 16 players with it.If the money will be lowered SA will be very much affected as they then will not have enough money to spend in the draft period after retaining their 10 players.My total is also very high but with M Attapatu and G Richards retiring it can be managed.

mate i will have pretty much enough money to retain all my players - and i am in div 4 for 4 dayers, i think if you look at it you will be pretty much right too, especially with your retirements giving you a little more budget - also remember you get extra for winning divisions

 

[marc71178]

The reason for Kirby salary is he just bowls exceptionally in one form and doesn't bat at all.So there is not much money for his bowling in one day and for batting.Almost the full amount is for his four day bowling.

But if he's really really good at one aspect, that should be reflected more!

I think all we're proving here is how difficult it is to model wages based on stats.

Makes Rich's idea (where managers decide for themselves how valuable the players are but have a total budget to meet) seem a lot easier!

 

[marc71178]

also remember you get extra for winning divisions

Theoretically you will, but nothing is set in stone yet (even the introduction of finance!)