No that's not the point. I meant that when you set your target for players, you can list them as playmakers, wingmen and post players. Because I've found that's the easiest classification :-D
it's easy to set targets for two roles: SG's and C's. They are mostly dependent on a short subset of key skills, and you can better focus on them.
About PG's you have a quite more complex combination of skills, so it is not unlikely that an U21 PG could float between PG and SG (Scalambrieri did), depending on his development path. So, although my own team succeeded with three PG's on the field (I do think it is a great performance multiplier), I could decide to have even a so-called SG on the field (may be missing one level in PA to be back to PG classification, but great in R&G in the case).
About PF's, you should consider the effect of JS and OD. However, in this case too you could fluctuate between C and PF classification: you could decide to anticipate ID and RB to have better primaries (may with 4/5 in OD and JS), then push shooting to increase both IS and JS and have your PF.
About SF's, well, there are too many variables to set values right now, as I don't know how SF are considered by Malaysian trainers. In Italy elections 20% of posts are about "ideal" SF!
If I would bet, I would expect to them too an increase of salary of about 30-40% for top 4-5 players, however this is a tricky comparison.