True Shooting Percentage

[staywhite]

Are Kobe fans the only ones who use this system on ish?

[PickernRoller]

Mostly yeah....a problem? Is it funny? Weird? Or are you looking for a couple smilies to make you feel better after being butthurt in another thread.

47 post in with a quality thread. Another saved alt activated after hibernating for 2 years.

The irrelevance of this thread is superfluous.

fpii is nice...below.

[fpliii]

Not really a Kobe fan, but I use it all the time. I was kinda shocked at the opposition to it last night in that thread. There are flaws (estimating and1s when there's play-by-play data available back to 96-97 now, which is the first season in which the NBA recorded it; shoot 3 to make 2 and one FT fouls way back in the day too), but it's without doubt the best measure of scoring efficiency.

[CanYouDigIt]

Are Kobe fans the only ones who use this system on ish?
http://gyazo.com/bd54e7b9e7d2c6ffa4c3a02932e12149.png

http://gyazo.com/b3328874262e100ee8aea715ceccb50f.png

[staywhite]

Mostly yeah....a problem? Is it funny? Weird? Or are you looking for a couple smilies to make you feel better after being butthurt in another thread.

47 post in with a quality thread. Another saved alt activated after hibernating for 2 years.

The irrelevance of this thread is superfluous.

fpii is nice...below.

I guess it's though when you you see a fg% of 42% 41% you have to make it look better? I read more than I post sir! Thanks

[chips93]

Not really a Kobe fan, but I use it all the time. I was kinda shocked at the opposition to it last night in that thread. There are flaws (estimating and1s when there's play-by-play data available back to 96-97 now, which is the first season in which the NBA recorded it; shoot 3 to make 2 and one FT fouls way back in the day too), but it's without doubt the best measure of scoring efficiency.

which thread?

[fpliii]

which thread?

Something about Kobe's 07 season I believe. A good 5-10 posters were sounding off.

[CanYouDigIt]

I like how Kobe fans go silent seeing that Kobe doesn't even crack the top 30 :lol

[PickernRoller]

I guess it's though when you you see a fg% of 42% 41% you have to make it look better? I read more than I post sir! Thanks
Hard to believe.....
----
Btw it's not a guess as fpii has outlined. It's a stat....that simple.

CanyouDigit. I know you are desperate for attention. How about falling from a 10 story building. Enough to make it on the evening news.:lol :lol

Drooling over Hollinger sh1t will make you go mad doe...

It's not only Kobe who's missing. It's the entire GOAT TOP 10. Lebron stans do fail in remarkable ways. Ohhh wait...but but....it wasn't counted back then...:cry: ...:roll: ....gave two flying f'cks...NOT.

[chazzy]

It's probably the most basic of advanced stats. If you use offensive and defensive rating to rank teams in a given year, then you shouldn't have an issue with TS%

[Owl]

Nope.

I personally find that there are some utterly unbearable Kobe stans on these forums. But I find ts% to be a valid and valuable tool.

3s are more valuable than twos. Getting to the free throw line, if you're semi-competant from there, is valuable. TS% is useful. Some people will misuse it (e.g. across eras without looking at league average) as they will with any tool.

[intrinsic]

I like how Kobe fans go silent seeing that Kobe doesn't even crack the top 30 :lol

I don't think you have a really good handle of the TS% statistic or its purpose.

[CanYouDigIt]

CanyouDigit. I know you are desperate for attention. How about falling from a 10 story building. Enough to make it on the evening news.:lol :lol

I'll gladly do it the day you get off my couch.

[PickernRoller]

I'll gladly do it the day you get off my couch.

Sitting a world away on a nice comfy office chair. If you're hallucinating I advice you take Lebron's c0ck off your mouth. That usually seems to do the trick with Lebron stans. Let me know how it goes....post dramatic stress usually follows. Can't help with that. That's why I advised jumping off a building. Only logical solution in this situation.

[ralph_i_el]

It's much more useful than fg%
I don't know how anyone can think otherwise. FG% makes players that shoot 3's look bad, and players that don't shoot any jumpers look good.

Either way you have to look at USG% when you're using either

[CanYouDigIt]

Sitting a world away on a nice comfy office chair. If you're hallucinating I advice you take Lebron's c0ck off your mouth. That usually seems to do the trick with Lebron stans. Let me know how it goes....post dramatic stress usually follows. Can't help with that. That's why I advised jumping off a building. Only logical solution in this situation.

I like how you would assume someone you dislikes Kobe to be a Lebron c0ck rider.

You Kobetards are what make people hate Kobe so much. You all constantly try to make Kobe look like the Wilt of SGs and CONTINUOUSLY try to make Kobe relevant.

How about you get your head out Kobe's ass, get a job, leave ISH, and do something better than your life claiming to be a LA Sports fan since birth even though you probably live in some crappy motel in Kansas.

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[HoopsFanNumero1]

Who's the biggest retard on this site:
- PickernRoller
- Magic 32
- KennethGriffin
- Fresh Kid

[GrapeApe]

My issue with TS% is free throws. Three pointers are justly weighted as they should be, but I don't like the fact that a player can shoot 5/18, go 19/20 from the line and it's considered an efficient performance. That just doesn't sit right with me. As with any stat, context is key.

[PickernRoller]

I like how you would assume someone you dislikes Kobe to be a Lebron c0ck rider.

You Kobetards are what make people hate Kobe so much. You all constantly try to make Kobe look like the Wilt of SGs and CONTINUOUSLY try to make Kobe relevant.

How about you get your head out Kobe's ass, get a job, leave ISH, and do something better than your life claiming to be a LA Sports fan since birth even though you probably live in some crappy motel in Kansas.

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Nice tantrum...cool story, now jump.


Who's the biggest retard on this site:
- PickernRoller
- Magic 32
- KennethGriffin
- Fresh Kid

You surely haven't forgotten....:lol :roll: :roll:

Gotten all the Lebron stans riled up lately. Apr 2013's no less......this new breed of alts....ugh.

Can't take it, don't play the game. Ignore list was made for a reason. Use it....or stop the whining butthurt.

[Young X]

TS% is the best stat to measure overall scoring efficiency cuz it includes the extra points players get from free throws and 3's. You can have a good FG% and still be an inefficient scorer if you're a bad FT shooter and don't hit 3's.

Player A goes 8/16 from the field, 1/4 from 3 and 5/9 from the line

Player B goes 7/16 from the field, 3/4 from 3 and 8/9 from the line

Both players used the same amount of possessions. Player A shot a higher FG% but who scored more points per possession?

[Jacks3]

Every reasonable person will use TS% over FG%. It's a much better measure of scoring efficiency and it's not arguable. I honestly don't understand why people are so against it.

Strange.

[iamgine]

My issue with TS% is free throws. Three pointers are justly weighted as they should be, but I don't like the fact that a player can shoot 5/18, go 19/20 from the line and it's considered an efficient performance. That just doesn't sit right with me. As with any stat, context is key.
Why not? I think it's an efficient performance if his peers had lower TS% than that.

[riseagainst]

My issue with TS% is free throws. Three pointers are justly weighted as they should be, but I don't like the fact that a player can shoot 5/18, go 19/20 from the line and it's considered an efficient performance. That just doesn't sit right with me. As with any stat, context is key.

why not? Freethrows are the most efficient way of scoring points. No fastbreaks if you miss a shot, no defenders, puts your opposition into foul trouble.

[Young X]

Scoring efficiency = points per possession.

The player with the higher TS% is the player that scored more points per possession.

Simple.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Not really a Kobe fan, but I use it all the time. I was kinda shocked at the opposition to it last night in that thread. There are flaws (estimating and1s when there's play-by-play data available back to 96-97 now, which is the first season in which the NBA recorded it; shoot 3 to make 2 and one FT fouls way back in the day too), but it's without doubt the best measure of scoring efficiency.

Yeah, estimating for years we have play by play data for just seems lazy, imo. Though more importantly, it does give you an idea, and the margin for error isn't that big.

[Jacks3]

Scoring efficiency = points per possession.

The player with the higher TS% is the player that scored more points per possession.

Simple.
Exactly. Simple stuff. :confusedshrug:

[GrapeApe]

why not? Freethrows are the most efficient way of scoring points. No fastbreaks if you miss a shot, no defenders, puts your opposition into foul trouble.

Good points, and I can't really argue with any of that. It's just that it brings officiating/subjectivity into play, and to me, that seems odd for a statistic based on a mathematical formula. I guess I'm nitpicking though as most great offensive players have a high TS%, so the formula does appear to be relevant in most cases. I'm also a fan of PER and I know that uses TS%.

[3LiftHeatCurse]

Nope.

I personally find that there are some utterly unbearable Kobe stans on these forums. But I find ts% to be a valid and valuable tool.

3s are more valuable than twos. Getting to the free throw line, if you're semi-competant from there, is valuable. TS% is useful. Some people will misuse it (e.g. across eras without looking at league average) as they will with any tool.

no, 3's are not more valuable than two's. They are worth 1 more point, but their chances of going in is drastically reduced. You have to take into account each failed possession, each miss. These are plays that a team can run the fastbreak.

Especially when you consider long jumpshots (3's) usually create long rebounds = fastbreak point opportunities.

Meanwhile, a guy who scored a 2pter forces enemy team to inbound and lets your team set your defense, increasing your chances of a successful defensive stand.

A shooter who goes 4/12 from 3pt and a shooter who goes 6/12 from 2pt.... that's 2 extra failed possessions for the 3pt shooter. Long rebounds. No set defense.

I didn't even mention the effect that an effective 50% 2pt shooter has on Team Morale for both your team vs the opposing team. Your team watching you have a good shooting night, and having successful offensive possessions, with better Defensive stands, is a boost to Team Psyche. And it's a drain on the enemy team's Psyche and Morale when they see a player shooting well and they are working hard on Offense vs a set Defense.


And lastly, I didn't even talk about how TS% gives too much weight to FT's, something entirely subjective to bad officiating and/or NBA rigging/mafia rigging or NBA Superstar treatment giving up phantom fouls. If you don't agree, just picture an old fat man playing in the NBA, and the referee's call a foul for him everytime he goes down the court. He would score a billion points and TS% would rate him highly. But the man can't ball for shit.

So, no, TS% is a stupid, mongoloid stat by Hollinger that only Kobetards adopted to try and make up for his terrible FG selection.

[riseagainst]

no, 3's are not more valuable than two's. They are worth 1 more point, but their chances of going in is drastically reduced. You have to take into account each failed possession, each miss. These are plays that a team can run the fastbreak.

Especially when you consider long jumpshots (3's) usually create long rebounds = fastbreak point opportunities.

Meanwhile, a guy who scored a 2pter forces enemy team to inbound and lets your team set your defense, increasing your chances of a successful defensive stand.

A shooter who goes 4/12 from 3pt and a shooter who goes 6/12 from 2pt.... that's 2 extra failed possessions for the 3pt shooter. Long rebounds. No set defense.

I didn't even mention the effect that an effective 50% 2pt shooter has on Team Morale for both your team vs the opposing team. Your team watching you have a good shooting night, and having successful offensive possessions, with better Defensive stands, is a boost to Team Psyche. And it's a drain on the enemy team's Psyche and Morale when they see a player shooting well and they are working hard on Offense vs a set Defense.


So, no, TS% is a stupid, mongoloid stat by Hollinger that only Kobetards adopted to try and make up for his terrible FG selection.

so you don't like PER and WS as well?

[3LiftHeatCurse]

And lastly, I didn't even talk about how TS% gives too much weight to FT's, something entirely subjective to bad officiating and/or NBA rigging/mafia rigging or NBA Superstar treatment giving up phantom fouls. If you don't agree, just picture an old fat man playing in the NBA, and the referee's call a foul for him everytime he goes down the court. He would score a billion points and TS% would rate him highly. But the man can't ball for shit. Any system that would allow for a scenario like that to happen is horseshit and worth it's weight in my shit.

It's a stat for media manufactured stars... like Kobe.

[Rose'sACL]

If you believe league is not rigged then TS% is the best stat to show player efficiency.
If you believe league is rigged then eFG% is the best stat to show player efficiency.

[3LiftHeatCurse]

If you believe league is not rigged then TS% is the best stat to show player efficiency.
If you believe league is rigged then eFG% is the best stat to show player efficiency.

Nope, still don't agree. Because TS% ignores failed possessions on 3pters.

3pt shot is a low percentage shot.

More missed shots.
More long rebounds.
Less chances for an offensive rebound.
More fastbreak opportunities for opponent.
Your Defense can't set up as effectively due to a failed possession, which means worse defense.


TS% doesn't take any of that into account.

Successfully shooting a high % from 2 is much more beneficial to team success.

[staywhite]

My issue with TS% is free throws. Three pointers are justly weighted as they should be, but I don't like the fact that a player can shoot 5/18, go 19/20 from the line and it's considered an efficient performance. That just doesn't sit right with me. As with any stat, context is key.

Same here, imagine if LBJ can hit a damn free throw lol

Lebron TS% 86

[PJR]

I do find it rather comical how the contingent of Kobe fanatics on this forum will push TS%, but render PER useless. Any advance stat that doesn't put Kobe in a more favorable light is no bueno. :oldlol:

[staywhite]

I do find it rather comical how the contingent of Kobe fanatics on this forum will push TS%, but render PER useless. Any advance stat that doesn't put in Kobe is in a more favorable light is no bueno. :oldlol:


Every stat is see a kobe fan post is TS%TS%TS%

No mother fcker, he shot 39% from the field :no:

[iamgine]

Nope, still don't agree. Because TS% ignores failed possessions on 3pters.

3pt shot is a low percentage shot.

More missed shots.
More long rebounds.
Less chances for an offensive rebound.
More fastbreak opportunities for opponent.
Your Defense can't set up as effectively due to a failed possession, which means worse defense.


TS% doesn't take any of that into account.

Successfully shooting a high % from 2 is much more beneficial to team success.
3 pt shot
Score more
spread the opponents.
Long rebounds means more offensive rebound
If the team has a proper defense practiced for three pointer then it won't be worse.

[Young X]

Chauncey Billups is the perfect example.

In 2006 Chauncey Billups averaged 18.5 pts on 42%.

Normally you idiots would look at his FG% and call him an inefficient chucker without realizing he shot 43% from 3 on 5 attempts per game and shot 89% from the line on 6 attempts per game. That's puts him at 60 TS% - that's VERY efficient.

Just because a player has a low FG% doesn't automatically mean he's an inefficient scorer.

Idiots.

[NumberSix]

Not really a Kobe fan, but I use it all the time. I was kinda shocked at the opposition to it last night in that thread. There are flaws (estimating and1s when there's play-by-play data available back to 96-97 now, which is the first season in which the NBA recorded it; shoot 3 to make 2 and one FT fouls way back in the day too), but it's without doubt the best measure of scoring efficiency.
No it isn't. eFG% is.

[riseagainst]

No it isn't. eFG% is.

eFG is shooting efficiency, not scoring efficiency. There are 3 ways to score, not 2.

[ZenMaster]

no, 3's are not more valuable than two's. They are worth 1 more point, but their chances of going in is drastically reduced. You have to take into account each failed possession, each miss. These are plays that a team can run the fastbreak.

Especially when you consider long jumpshots (3's) usually create long rebounds = fastbreak point opportunities.

Meanwhile, a guy who scored a 2pter forces enemy team to inbound and lets your team set your defense, increasing your chances of a successful defensive stand.

A shooter who goes 4/12 from 3pt and a shooter who goes 6/12 from 2pt.... that's 2 extra failed possessions for the 3pt shooter. Long rebounds. No set defense.

I didn't even mention the effect that an effective 50% 2pt shooter has on Team Morale for both your team vs the opposing team. Your team watching you have a good shooting night, and having successful offensive possessions, with better Defensive stands, is a boost to Team Psyche. And it's a drain on the enemy team's Psyche and Morale when they see a player shooting well and they are working hard on Offense vs a set Defense.

I think you're putting too much emphasis on the long rebounds and fast break opportunites, those are hardly a given and here is why:

All NBA teams play rotating defenses, and good offensive teams have good spacing where they will get good and what is considered to be open shots at NBA level. But teams play rotating defenses which means they will be moving when a shot goes up after a good offensive possesion with ball movement. The defense moving while rotating makes it a lot harder to rebound.
A 3pointer is in the air longer, and when you shoot it from a side you know it will rebound on the other side about 70% of the time, so you now have more time for player to move in the correct postion. You also see a lot more use of the tipping rebounds where the players will slap it towards the top of the key where there's always an offensive player moving to on shots, this is a direct strategy to counter what your saying.

What you're saying is right though, a 50%+ 2pt scorer is very valuable, but they hardly ever come through mid sized jump shooters who get open 2's all the time, spacing and defense doesn't allow for that. Most of the 50% scorers are big players often taller than 6-10 and they're often citicized of getting too large contracts.





And lastly, I didn't even talk about how TS% gives too much weight to FT's, something entirely subjective to bad officiating and/or NBA rigging/mafia rigging or NBA Superstar treatment giving up phantom fouls. If you don't agree, just picture an old fat man playing in the NBA, and the referee's call a foul for him everytime he goes down the court. He would score a billion points and TS% would rate him highly. But the man can't ball for shit.

So, no, TS% is a stupid, mongoloid stat by Hollinger that only Kobetards adopted to try and make up for his terrible FG selection.

TS% wasn't made for fans subjective towards different players. It's a stat to see how a player has performed from an overall effeciency stand point.
Yeah you can not like how different players get different treatment from refs, I don't either, but they still do and still will and still scored the points from it. Say I'm a GM negotiation for a contract, it just doesn't matter to me if a player got 62 "extra" points from what could be treatment calls, the player will probably get that again the next year and the year after that.

[NumberSix]

eFG is shooting efficiency, not scoring efficiency. There are 3 ways to score, not 2.
But free throw shooting already has its own statistic. There's no need to jumble it into another metric. If a player shoots 50% eFG% and 80% FT%, you already know all you need to know. There's no need to mash them together and add a margin of inaccuracy where there wasn't any to begin with.

[riseagainst]

silly people. Most people here who argue against TS only worry about the freethrows involved in the calculation and not the actual meaning of TS.
TS is essentially points per possession. The 0.44 constant represents the percent of possessions 1 freethrow is equivalent to. The 0.44 is derived and not a universal constant, as it could change in the future. But through decades worth of statistical data, they have determined that each free throw represents not one half (0.5) of a possession, but slightly over four tenths (0.44) of a possession.

[ZenMaster]

But free throw shooting already has its own statistic. There's no need to jumble it into another metric. If a player shoots 50% eFG% and 80% FT%, you already know all you need to know. There's no need to mash them together and add a margin of inaccuracy where there wasn't any to begin with.

If you want to look at what a players eFG% and FT% you just do that.
But if you want to gauge a players complete efficiency you have to combine the 3 because TS% takes into account the total number of free throws a player has made and not just his % of makes.

[riseagainst]

But free throw shooting already has its own statistic. There's no need to jumble it into another metric. If a player shoots 50% eFG% and 80% FT%, you already know all you need to know. There's no need to mash them together and add a margin of inaccuracy where there wasn't any to begin with.


eFG are TS are completely different stats to begin with anyway. eFG is points per SHOT, while TS is points per POSSESSION. Both are pretty good stats while TS has a margin for error due to the 0.44.

[Micku]

I always though of TS% being a way to see how efficient a scorer is when you combine all aspects on the floor. 3pt shooting, FTs, and FGs.

eFG just takes into account while the defense is live. FG too, but it's more simple. All of them are good stats. No single one is the end all stat. Each of them have their purpose along with actually watching the game.

[Owl]

1) The game isn't about "failed possessions" its about points per possession.
2) If 3s lead to more long boards then theoretically there would also be more 2nd chance points (both in absolute terms because more misses and as a proportion of misses). I think studies have suggested it doesn't actually work like that (in terms of proportion of possible offensive boards), but then I'd want to see research proving that 3 point attempts do lead to more fast break points.

@Number six
Because the seperate eFG% and ft% would be missing out on a significant data point in how efficient an offensive player is. How often they're taking and making fts relative to how often they're shooting.

e.g. It's a tiny sample size but Al Cervi in '52-53. He shot a, for the time, very strong .437 from the field. But because he was taking 10 FTs for every 7 FGA his efficiency was extraordinary for his era.

Admittedly a poor example in real life because free throw rules were probably different etc, but the central point, that getting a shot with an expected value of 1.5+ points per possession (very rough calculation based on average ft shooter at 75% and ft at .5 of a possession though best estimates place it around .44 for modern era) is a very good thing.

Its not great that technical FTs, and ones etc aren't accounted for on an individual basis but the influence, from what I've read, is marginal.

[Young X]

eFG are TS are completely different stats to begin with anyway. eFG is points per SHOT, while TS is points per POSSESSION. Both are pretty good stats while TS has a margin for error due to the 0.44.
^Exactly.

Deandre Jordan led the league in FG% and EFG%, but was only 9th in TS%. Why? because he was a HORRIBLE free throw shooter - most of the times he went to the line, it was a turnover for the Clippers. Look at how many games the Lakers lost because of Dwight's terrible free throw shooting last year.

Bottom line, if you wanna know how many points a player scores per possession (scoring efficiency), TS is the best stat to use.

[chazzy]

If FTs don't matter then I guess we should subtract them from point totals

[Jacks3]

:lol

[Akhenaten]

3s are more valuable than twos. Getting to the free throw line, if you're semi-competant from there, is valuable.


that is why the shooter is awarded an extra point
increasing a player's percentage based on value is doubly rewarding that player, not to mention the logic is unsound

if I take 10 threes and make 3, I MISSED 66% of my attempts period
saying that a player "truly" shot 50% is a flat out misrepresentation.

TS% is a FUGAZI stat

7 missed shots is 7 missed shots, 3 point misses usually lead to transition opportunities in the fast break game or early offense for the other team and less offensive rebounding opportunities, also floor balance is more likely to be compromised with long heaves from the basket. TS% doesn't consider that AT ALL.

TS% says making 4 of 10 threes is the equivalent of making 6 of 10 2 point shots, whether those 2's are layups, dunks or midrange shots.

Nothing could be further from the TRUTH.
Kobe making 4 of 10 threes does not equal Shaq making 6 of 10 dunks/layups hooks.

[fpliii]

If FTs don't matter then I guess we should subtract them from point totals

:applause:

[Jacks3]

Kobe making 4 of 10 threes does not equal Shaq making 6 of 10 dunks/layups hooks.
It is exactly equal though. :oldlol:

[PJR]

Citing TS% as a measure for scoring efficiency alone, without proper context added, is just as flawed as citing FG% alone.

And all these advanced statistics are subjective based upon the accuracy or inaccuracy of the raw data being input into the formula. Statistics in general only have a purpose when taken in proper context. However, Statistics in and of themselves, particularly when one is making an argument using a single statistic (like TS%), serve no purpose.

The NBA career leader in TS% is Cornbread Maxwell. And some guy named James Donaldson is 3rd all-time. Enough said.

TS% alone is a pretty useless and flawed statistic.

[TonyMontana]

Short Answer: Yes

Long Answer: Kobe fans use it because Kobe is the only all-time player with a shitty FG%(Bill Russell also but his niche was defense, Kobe IS a scorer). They like using this number instead to try and wiesel their way around Kobes obvious shortcomings when compared to other all-time greats that are unquestionably superior to the informed fan.

[Owl]

that is why the shooter is awarded an extra point
increasing a player's percentage based on value is doubly rewarding that player, not to mention the logic is unsound

if I take 10 threes and make 3, I MISSED 66% of my attempts period
saying that a player "truly" shot 50% is a flat out misrepresentation.

TS% is a FUGAZI stat

7 missed shots is 7 missed shots, 3 point misses usually lead to transition opportunities in the fast break game or early offense for the other team and less offensive rebounding opportunities, also floor balance is more likely to be compromised with long heaves from the basket. TS% doesn't consider that AT ALL.

TS% says making 4 of 10 threes is the equivalent of making 6 of 10 2 point shots, whether those 2's are layups, dunks or midrange shots.

Nothing could be further from the TRUTH.
Kobe making 4 of 10 threes does not equal Shaq making 6 of 10 dunks/layups hooks.
Theres one valid point here. It's probably better not being called a %. You can easily double it and call it points per possession. Some people do use it like that. It's basically the stat though.

All the rest? It's not double rewarding any more than counting assists is double rewarding a team for a basket. It's just providing extra info.

Also by your statements shouldn't we have seperate percentages for all ranges. You're surely more likely to grab an offensive board if you're shooting from within 3 feet of the basket, so a miss from there is less bad.

If and when you can calculate the value of each shot and miss accounting for distance from basket, floor spacing, probability of offensive rebound, time remaining left on the shot clock, whether its garbage time, probability of fast break points depending on (a) the shooting arc and miss tendencies: long, short, airball etc, of the shooter (b) the proximity to the basket of each teams better rebounders, (c) the outlet passing skill of said rebounders (d) the position of the players on the shooters team etc then yeah we'll have a better number for the offensive value provided by players.

But you say one thing the supposed increased probability of long rebounds and supposed increased probability of fast breaks renders it invalid. Well all the most of the above is missed by regular field goal percentage, plus it doesn't account for your ability to draw fouls or make threes.

Unless you'd rather have a player who shot 46% all 2s never draws fouls than one shoots 45% shooting exclusively 3s and consistently draws fouls then you have to acknowledge that ts% has merit as at least a complementary tool. Personally I'd say a much better one.

[Young X]

TS% = points per possession, nothing more, nothing less.

Player A goes 8/16 from the field, 1/4 from 3 and 5/9 from the line

Player B goes 7/16 from the field, 3/4 from 3 and 8/9 from the line

Both players used the same amount of possessions. Player A shot a higher FG% but who scored more points per possession?

^Can someone please answer this?

[Jacks3]

According to you idiots who use FG%, Wade's 2013 Finals were great because he shot 49% from the field even though he didn't get to the line or hit threes (horrible 50.5 TS ). You must be the same morons who think Rondo is a efficiency God because he shoots 50% from the field. :oldlol:

[Owl]

Citing TS% as a measure for scoring efficiency alone, without proper context added, is just as flawed as citing FG% alone.

And all these advanced statistics are subjective based upon the accuracy or inaccuracy of the raw data being input into the formula. Statistics in general only have a purpose when taken in proper context. However, Statistics in and of themselves, particularly when one is making an argument using a single statistic (like TS%), serve no purpose.

The NBA career leader in TS% is Cornbread Maxwell. And some guy named James Donaldson is 3rd all-time. Enough said.

TS% alone is a pretty useless and flawed statistic.
All single category stats are useless without context. Points and %s are particularly dependent on one another for context and require league pace and to a degree team context to be factored in (and compared with the league average for that era).

Nonetheless, it's a more informative measure of offensive officiency than regular fg%. Fg% draws on less information and thus short changes players who can 3s and draw fouls such as Chauncey Billups.

[LAZERUSS]

Maybe someone can give me a RATIONAL explanation as to how Tyson Chandler can shoot .679 from the field, .689 from the line, .000 (0-2) from the arc...and have a TS% of .708. makes no sense at all.

And I am seeing this stat being used more-and-more lately... points/FGA... which takes into account FT shooting IMPACT. A player that goes 12-20 from the line has a FAR greater significance in the outcome of a game, over a player who shoots 4-4.

[Trollsmasher]

Short Answer: Yes

Long Answer: Kobe fans use it because Kobe is the only all-time player with a shitty FG%(Bill Russell also but his niche was defense, Kobe IS a scorer). They like using this number instead to try and wiesel their way around Kobes obvious shortcomings when compared to other all-time greats that are unquestionably superior to the informed fan.
Funny thing is that the difference in TS% between Kobe and other greats is still the same and sometimes even bigger as the FG% difference:lol

[fpliii]

Maybe someone can give me a RATIONAL explanation as to how Tyson Chandler can shoot .679 from the field, .689 from the line, .000 (0-2) from the arc...and have a TS% of .708. makes no sense at all.

And I am seeing this stat being used more-and-more lately... points/FGA... which takes into account FT shooting IMPACT. A player that goes 12-20 from the line has a FAR greater significance in the outcome of a game, over a player who shoots 4-4.

I like to look at it alongside TSA (FGA+0.44*FTA). Haven't yet decided what the break-even point is at each TSA level (or what's good, great, etc.), but I'll play around with the datasets when I have some spare time.

[che guevara]

The reason people don't accept it are because 1.) People don't like new things, and are very used to FG%. 2.) People especially don't like new things they don't understand (just read through this thread to see how many people can't grasp the concept of TS%). 3.) And most importantly, they don't understand that TS% just measures points per possession, and it's not really a percentage. The formula translates the points per possession into a FG%-esque percentage just to make it more digestable to people who are used to FG%, when really it's the same as a points per posession number.


3's are not more valuable than two's. They are worth 1 more point, but their chances of going in is drastically reduced. You have to take into account each failed possession, each miss. These are plays that a team can run the fastbreak.
Lol, this is just retarded. TS% doesn't ignore the missed threes, you dunce. It takes into account failed possessions but not rewarding points for them.


Especially when you consider long jumpshots (3's) usually create long rebounds = fastbreak point opportunities.
Threes are also more likely to be rebounded by the offensive team, canceling out any fastbreak advantage. And long two pointers hardly have different bounces than threes anyway.


Meanwhile, a guy who scored a 2pter forces enemy team to inbound and lets your team set your defense, increasing your chances of a successful defensive stand.
A scored 3 pointer also forces the "enemy team" (is this a video game or some shit? "enemy team"?) to inbound. The difference is that a three gives the offensive team an extra point, and is therefore more valuable.


A shooter who goes 4/12 from 3pt and a shooter who goes 6/12 from 2pt.... that's 2 extra failed possessions for the 3pt shooter. Long rebounds. No set defense.
4x3=12. 6x2=12. It's the same result. Threes are also more likely to be rebounded by the offensive team.


I didn't even mention the effect that an effective 50% 2pt shooter has on Team Morale for both your team vs the opposing team. Your team watching you have a good shooting night, and having successful offensive possessions, with better Defensive stands, is a boost to Team Psyche. And it's a drain on the enemy team's Psyche and Morale when they see a player shooting well and they are working hard on Offense vs a set Defense.
Lol @ this team morale garbage. Seriously, you have to resort to this kind of shit?



And lastly, I didn't even talk about how TS% gives too much weight to FT's, something entirely subjective to bad officiating and/or NBA rigging/mafia rigging or NBA Superstar treatment giving up phantom fouls. If you don't agree, just picture an old fat man playing in the NBA, and the referee's call a foul for him everytime he goes down the court. He would score a billion points and TS% would rate him highly. But the man can't ball for shit.
This is retarded. Even if the free throws are from a bullshit call, they still effect the score and don't count any less towards anything. The old fat man would have more impact than any other player on the court in this case; doesn't make it fair, but that's the way it is.

Btw, I'm not a Kobe fan at all, but I am a Lebron fan. Doesn't make me deny the obvious fact that FG% doesn't measure scoring efficiency, while TS% does.

[Owl]

Maybe someone can give me a RATIONAL explanation as to how Tyson Chandler can shoot .679 from the field, .689 from the line, .000 (0-2) from the arc...and have a TS% of .708. makes no sense at all.

And I am seeing this stat being used more-and-more lately... points/FGA... which takes into account FT shooting IMPACT. A player that goes 12-20 from the line has a FAR greater significance in the outcome of a game, over a player who shoots 4-4.
TS% advantage (over fg%) is precisely that it accounts for the impact of drawing FTs. You could be below average in each shooting department but if you're shooting a lot of high value shots (i.e. a 70% ft shooter who gets to the line a lot, or to a lesser degree guy whose fg% is low but that's because a large percentage of his shots are 3s and he makes them at a reasonable rate).

Basically it has the advantage of points per fga, without pretending that free throws don't consume possessions.

It doesn't make sense if you think of it literally as a percentage. It isn't one. Think of it as points per possesion divided by and its perfectly accurate (or double it a call it ppp, or just call it points per half possession). The .44 value estimated for a value of a possession is as ever based on the fact that not all free throws come in pairs, and they don't all cede possession. Some are from techs, some are fouls on 3s, some are "and ones" etc . Ironically .44 value falls between the 0 posession value you like for free throws in the pts/fga, and the .5 value you'd like because its neat and everyone's ts% would be between their fg% and their ft% (well unless they were canning a lot of 3s).

To be honest putting a .5 possession value wouldn't change much at all. It would just make those frequently fouled players (such as the Malones, Wilt, Shaq, Kobe, MJ etc) look very slightly worse.

That said, I've had this debate before and no one whose committed to their favourite measure changes their stance whatsoever.

[ZenMaster]

Maybe someone can give me a RATIONAL explanation as to how Tyson Chandler can shoot .679 from the field, .689 from the line, .000 (0-2) from the arc...and have a TS% of .708. makes no sense at all.

And I am seeing this stat being used more-and-more lately... points/FGA... which takes into account FT shooting IMPACT. A player that goes 12-20 from the line has a FAR greater significance in the outcome of a game, over a player who shoots 4-4.

It's because he shot a lot more high % 2s (where he shot a good percentage) than free throws (where he didn't shoot a good percentage) and almost no 3's.

[LAZERUSS]

TS% advantage (over fg%) is precisely that it accounts for the impact of drawing FTs. You could be below average in each shooting department but if you're shooting a lot of high value shots (i.e. a 70% ft shooter who gets to the line a lot, or to a lesser degree guy whose fg% is low but that's because a large percentage of his shots are 3s and he makes them at a reasonable rate).

Basically it has the advantage of points per fga, without pretending that free throws don't consume possessions.

It doesn't make sense if you think of it literally as a percentage. It isn't one. Think of it as points per possesion divided by and its perfectly accurate (or double it a call it ppp, or just call it points per half possession). The .44 value estimated for a value of a possession is as ever based on the fact that not all free throws come in pairs, and they don't all cede possession. Some are from techs, some are fouls on 3s, some are "and ones" etc . Ironically .44 value falls between the 0 posession value you like for free throws in the pts/fga, and the .5 value you'd like because its neat and everyone's ts% would be between their fg% and their ft% (well unless they were canning a lot of 3s).

To be honest putting a .5 possession value wouldn't change much at all. It would just make those frequently fouled players (such as the Malones, Wilt, Shaq, Kobe, MJ etc) look very slightly worse.

That said, I've had this debate before and no one whose committed to their favourite measure changes their stance whatsoever.

I guess I am too old to learn new things. I can certainly understand eFG%, which basically rewards 3pt made shots as one-and-half times a 2 pt shot. So a player that shoots 4-10 from the arc, and 5-10 from inside the arc, would be considered as having shot 11-20 from the field, or .550.

To me TS% would be something along these lines...2 x 1.5 x 3pt FGM/3pt FGA, + 2x both FGA/FGM, + FT/FTA

Using Tyson Chandler's 2011-12 season:

He shot 0-2 from the arc, 241-353 (355-2 on his 3pt shots) from inside the arc, and 217-315 from the line.

Or 0-4 + 482/706 + 217-315 = 699/1025 = ..68195 (.682)

So that .682 actually does fall in between his .679 FG% and .689 FT%, but is obviously weighted considerably more to his FG%, which it should be.

How about another example? Bruce Bowen from 2002-03:

Actual numbers were: 223-479 from the field, which included 101-229 from the arc...or... 122-250 from 2 pt range, and 101-229 from 3 pt. range. His actual eFG% was .571, which was determined by, 122-250 + 101 x1.5/229, 122-250 + 151.5/229, or 273.5/479= .57098 or .571.

So MY TS% for a 2002-03 Bruce Bowen would look like this:

122-250 x 2, or 244/500 + 101 x1.5/229 x2, or 303/478 + FTs which were 36/89 (yes, he actually shot worse from the line than he did from the arc)

so

244/500 + 303/478 + 36/89 = 583/1067 or .54639 (.546.) His actual TS% (using your formula) was .563.

Why did I double the value of 3pt FGA and FGM? Because those shots are worth twice as much as a FTA (and as you can see above, I thne multiplied the 3pt mades by 1.5 to compensate for the extra point value.)

Does that make sense?



In any case, both MY formula, and the actual TS%, at least IMHO, do not effectively take into account FT IMPACT. Once again, a player shooting 12-20 from the line has a considerably higher impact than a player shooting 4-4 from the line. We simply don't know how many "and-one's" were taken, nor "bonus" shots (which, I maintain a missed "and-one" or "bonus" FT should not count in the FT%...only if they are made.) Nor does it take into account the unmeasureable benefit of getting opposing players in foul trouble, as well as getting teammates to the bonus faster, and more often.

[Nevaeh]

Exactly. Simple stuff. :confusedshrug:

Right, simple. Until a player like Lebron is proven to have a better Tee Ess %, then it's irrelevant again right?

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

[Jacks3]

LeBron has a much better TS%. He is a much more efficient scorer.

I have no problem admitting that. The fact that you guys really think this is just about Bryant is hilarious. EVERY single major basketball forum on the net except this site uses TS%. NBA.com has on it on their stats page. Every credible analyst online uses it for their articles. Nobody but a couple of morons on this site has a problem admitting that TS% is the best measure of scoring efficiency.

Deal with it.