*Contract Value vs TPE S25.02 Edition

[Duilio05]

@PMoney @Baron1898 because both of you wanted to see these graphs.

Welcome to Part Two of S25 edition of analysing contract value of players by tpe. In Part 1 of Edition S25 we looked at the averages for positions at the various TPE tiers as defined by contract minimums. What we observed was that players in S25 are on average regardless of position or tpe making less money than players were in S22, S21 and S20. There are some tpe tiers that were making more, most prominently CBs at 600-799 tpe, but that was the exception and not the majority. Turned out a few users wanted to see more data and got a bit excited upon seeing this graph that provides the TPE & Contract info for each individual player. So I am here to present those graphs.

Reminder that all data is ISFL related only. No DSFL players or contracts, including send downs, were included. All TPE values are from Sunday the 4th. Free Agents are not included either.


Graph 1

So here is our first graph. As said before these graphs depict the TPE and Contract info of each individual player, this graph being of QBs, every dot on the graph represents a specific QB in the league from a given season. Now instead of S25 being green like Part 1, S25 is blue. My bad, but not going back through to fix all of them. So make note of those color changes. Blue dots are players from S25, specifically QBs in this graph. Green is players from S22. Red is a mix of players from S21/S20, which I will explain more in depth very soon. The fourth color orange indicates the contract minimums at the beginning of each TPE Tier. So tier one is 50-199 TPE, so there is a dot at 50 TPE of $500K indicating the minimum for that tier. Next orange dot is at 200 TPE and $1M to indicate the minimum for players 200-399 TPE, etc.

I published similar looking graphs in Edition S20 and Edition S21, but I have made a few changes (I linked the jcink version of Edition S21 because I noticed the version on the new forums is cut short by 5 graphs @HO). I have now included linear trend lines for each series. I previously had not included trend lines because it is a bit miss representative of how minimum contracts work in our league. However since we are comparing more than two data sets I decided that having trend lines would more easily illustrate how contracts fluctuated by tpe in a given year. So to keep the trend line for Minimums as accurately representative as possible, I added a dot at 1400 TPE.  Why you may ask, because the trend line would instead look like this:


Graph 2

And that doesn’t give a very good representation of how contract minimums beyond 1000 TPE work. By adding a data point at 1400 TPE it pulls the trend line for Minimum down to be more reflective of how minimums work beyond 1000 TPE without much deviation of the trend line at the lower TPE levels. I guess I could have used a different trend line than linear, but all the graphs are made and just like the color for the data series, I'm not going back through and redoing them. I also not sure which kind of trend line would be more suitable than linear, I'm just an amateur trying to get T6 equipment.

Another change is dropping the highest y value from $12M to $10M.

Now let's talk about the data for the S20/S21 series on this graph. While graphs like QB, such as OL and KP have enough room that I could depict the entire data of each player from all four seasons, other positions like WR and CB there is just too many data points to actually distinguish what is going on. So in solution I combined S20 and S21 into a single data series. What do I mean by combined? Well I took the data for each season and broke them down by TPE tiers. For each TPE group I averaged the number of players from both seasons, and then selected that number of players to represent the two seasons together. When selecting the player data for each group I selected the lowest and highest TPE player in the TPE tier, the highest and lowest Contract if not already selected. Further player data selected to keep an accurate representation of the dispersal of TPE among players and average contract of the players in the TPE tier.

What? Sorry if you are now confused by that description. So I brought in the QB graph from the S21 Edition to help clarify.


Graph 3

Note that each S20/21 red dot from the new graph is representative of a dot from the old graph. Breaking it down there was an average of 1 QB each season(S20 & S21) between 400-599 TPE. Average of 0.5 QBs each season between 600-799. Average of 2.5 QBs each season between 800-999 TPE. Finally the two seasons average 5.5 QBs above 1000 TPE. Together the seasons averaged 10 QBs total. So I pulled the data of 10 QBs to represent the two seasons combined. I grabbed data for 1 QB from the 400-599 TPE Tier, 1 QB from the 600-799 TPE Tier, 2 QBs from the 800-999 TPE Tier, finally 6 QBs from >1000 TPE Tier. For the TPE Tiers below 800 TPE, there aren’t many options so I took the QB data I subjectively felt best represented the Tier. For 800-999 TPE Tier I had more options. So I grabbed the data for the QBs with lowest and highest TPE in the tier. For >1000 TPE Tier I did the same, grabbing the QBs with lowest and highest TPE in the tier. Since I need 6 QBs from this tier I could grab data for four more QBs. So I grabbed the QBs with the lowest and highest Contract from the tier if not already selected. I’m now at 4 of 6 QBs for the >1000 TPE Tier. The final two QBs I selected to maintain accurate TPE representation while maintaining an accurate average contract value for the TPE Tier. That is what I did for each TPE Tier of each position to represent the S20/S21 data.

I understand that some may say what I did is a bit of data cherry picking. My response is two part: I used average player numbers and average contract value of each TPE Tier to guide my selections; and it would be of concern if I was only presenting a small data set, but here I’m presenting data for 12 positions, each position having 10-30+ players, whose average data info I had already published in a previous edition last week. I did all that because I didn’t want our graphs to be too cluttered that we can’t distinguish anything. I could have made graphs of just S22 & S25 together and shared those with the old S21 & S20 graphs side by side, but felt I might be cheating the system getting paid twice for the same graphs I had previously posted a few seasons ago (identical graphs from Edition S21). *that said looking at the bank sheets, I didn’t receive any bonus for graphs when I published Edition S21. **fist shaking**

  *

Looking back at Graph 1, the new QB graph, the thing that sticks out to me is the trend lines. Both lines for S22 and S20/21, from roughly 1,000 TPE down, stay above the minimum while the S25 line is below it. Which from our graphs in Edition S25 Part 1 we should expect the S25 trend line to be the lowest or 2nd lowest line in most of these new graphs.


Graph 4 RB
Hey will you look at that, more players means more data points, and the trend lines for all three data series almost parallels the minimum trend line. That said, continuing with the pattern set by Part 1 of Edition 25, the S25 trend line is the only trend line that remains below the minimum trend line the entire graph.


Graph 5 WR
Look at all those dots! can you imagine trying to sort out whats going on if there were 30 more dots on there. So hope you understand and appreciate why i combined S20 and S21 together instead of keeping them separate. 

Once again the trend line for S25 is the only one that is below the minimum for large parts of the graph, and it is very clear why. The highest WR contract in S25 is only $5M while WRs in S20-S22 were getting paid as high as $9M!! Congrats to that guy, that’s enough to cover the entire season’s training cost, plus some equipment.


Graph 6 TE
Hey look at that we got a position, where the S25 trend line isn’t at the bottom. Which I’m actually surprised and confused by. In part one I noted that TEs had the second highest percent increase in the number of players on rosters in the league. There is now about 2.5 times more TEs in S25 than in S20 and S21. Count em. 8 TEs in S20/21. Do some math and multiply 8 by 2.5 equals 20. There are 21 TEs in S25, yet they’re making more money. Hmmm? Conspiracy.


Graph 7 OL
We see the first negative trend line. Remember that user OL was only starting to get traction in S20, so I blame it on the low number of players (data points) and that there were no OL players beyond 800 TPE. Still it is the only position in any season that has a negative trend. It is great to see the position improve and grow since those seasons.


Graph 8 DT


Graph 9 DE


Graph 10 LB
For LBs DTs and DEs look how S25 is the majority from 600-1000 TPE


Graph 11 CBs
One of the few times S25 trend line is the top line for a majority of a graph.


Graph 12 Ss
Despite having a player at $10M (the reason the original graphs in Editions S20 & S21 had y-axis going to $12M) and $8M the S20/21 trend line is second lowest from 500 to 1400 TPE.


Graph 13 KP
Yay Kickers in S25, as previously said in Part 1 of Edition S25. Wow S22 is really low. Only trend line below $2M the entire graph. Sure we could say that S22 kickers is suffering the same problem as OL S20/21 that there's not not enough data specifically players beyond 700 TPE, but the S20/21 trend line here for Kickers isn't below $2M the entire time despite not having any players over 600 TPE.

Lastly a few tables to compare number totals, which is what I think PMoney really wanted to see.


Table 1 and 2.
The top table shows the total number of players in the league by TPE and by Season, with the second table showing the same but averaged by number of teams in the league. Looking at the number of players above 1000 tpe, there was only 1 or 2 total player difference from season to season, but because the number of teams in the league has increased there has been a decrease in the average number of 1000 tpe players on each team.


Table 3
When broken down by each TPE Tier we see exactly what our graphs were showing. For S25 players from 200 to 1000+ TPE, contract averages were below the averages from S20, S21 and S22 (except S20 >1000 TPE). 

Looking at Ave Min Budget we see teams are having to spend more money this season than the other three seasons. If you are asking what the Ave Min Budget is, for each season I multiplied Players Per Team with TPE Minimum for each TPE Tier, then added them together. So example for S25 formula was (0.14*$0.5M)+(5.36*$1M)+(5.36*$2M)+etc.

All together the raw table data shows what we saw in our graphs, players are making less on average. However teams minimum salary budget has increased by $10M since S20 and S21, which roughly equates to the $3M-$5M minimum for the 2-3 more players teams have in comparison to S20 and S21. Yet S25 minimum budgets are roughly the same as S22 despite two less players on average. The reason for this is that teams have roughly 2 more players that require a $4M minimum than in S22, that is a $8M increase that wasn’t completely evened out even if there are fewer players per team in almost every other tier.

Baron and PMoney I hope that is everything you wanted. Happy to hear if I can provide anything further. A bit exhausted from going through all this so my analysis and discussion of the data I feel is a bit lacking, sorry.

[PMoney]

@Duilio05 This was definitely everything I wanted so thanks! Pretty much confirms your original hypothesis, even if the gap isn't massive

Media grading team better give you a phat bonus on this one if you didn't get anything last time

[Baron1898]

Yeah I just love seeing graphs so this is awesome

[Duilio05]

@Duilio05 This was definitely everything I wanted so thanks! Pretty much confirms your original hypothesis, even if the gap isn't massive

Media grading team better give you a phat bonus on this one if you didn't get anything last time

They gave me a bonus for last weeks edition. Thanks Media!!! i was complaining about no bonus for a previous edition