Lot's of conversations on the cap made me do some light maths and make a graph.
I am always recalling that it is reported that Orlando had the lowest payroll in the NBA, and that for next year and beyond, has enormous cap-flexibility, dependence on off-season moves.
So ....
Question 1: Given that the vast majority of teams are spending between 150-160M in payroll, and it is outlier teams like Orlando and Golden St. to be far outside that, how much money did teams pay in payroll per win?
Answer:
Washington 10057087.53
Detroit 9883543.286
Portland 7869713.952
Toronto 6579444.48
Charlotte 6547212.238
San Antonio 6457248.773
Memphis 6024056.444
Brooklyn 4861716.188
Golden State 4551189.935
Atlanta 4420927.583
Utah 4307691.871
Chicago 4246934.256
LA Clippers 3964804.196
Phoenix 3955895.551
Miami 3850946.565
Milwaukee 3823401.51
Houston 3669676.341
LA Lakers 3615636.596
Philadelphia 3543144.723
Cleveland 3476547.646
New Orleans 3385794.367
Sacramento 3366609.152
Dallas 3335117.68
New York 3325471.16
Denver 3191631.439
Indiana 3158985.745
Minnesota 2970255.839
Boston 2901285.641
Orlando 2822204.213
Oklahoma City 2819225.877
So, Washing paid 10M in payroll per win, whereas OKC paid 2.8M in payroll per win. Wow that is a huge window. (That the majority of the Magic wins came at home; Orlando management got Great value on home wins per salary!)
Some quick conclusions. 1) The terrible teams really wasted a lot of money this year. 2) OKC and Orlando were great investments for management gifting owners lots and lots of wins without spending much money. Boston, even at a high payroll, got real value out of their expenditures.
Question 2: Does salary lines correlate with win totals?
Actually more than I had expected. Every team over 170M in salary was at least mediocre. And many of the horrible teams had low payroll. But the r2 is still quite low. Mostly because of the clustering of salary lines in the 150-160 range.