I suppose that the potentials limits are not based in salary at all, and 2 players with different combination of skills make a different salary cap even if they share position and potential
I don't know what you studied, but caps do not depend on position.
I just say that after seeing hundreds of trainees, I can assure that the SF is the position that gets capped with less wage most of the times. You can see Allstars centers capped at 50k, PGs capped at 60k.. but SF (at least SFs with massive JS) are capped in the early 40s.I dont know how I can explain what I say, im just talking about wages, not skills, for example: try to find an Allstar SF with 80k wage, I can find Allstar centers, PGs, SGs or PFs with 80k+, yes, they were trained after getting capped (also some SFs), but they capped with a higher salary and thats why they got a further wage. As the Allstar SF caps early (40-45k) most of the times even if they keep training cant pass the 70k limit. (I never saw an Allstar SF going further than 70k, in the other 4 positions you can find Allstar players around 100k).And I agree with the fact that visible cap levels are not created equal, thats why the table has those minimum and maximum limits.Regards.
BB-Charles has shared in the past that potential is a cap on a "salary-like" variable, which can be reached in different ways. There is no reason to think that this cap changes based on position. As a matter of fact, this would result in players getting uncapped, or capped worse by virtue of changing positions, which has never been reported.
As a matter of fact, this would result in players getting uncapped, or capped worse by virtue of changing positions, which has never been reported.