Can someone here explain some stats to me?

[ronnymac2]

I believe FG% is useful. TS% is clearly the superior measure of actual efficiency, but FG% can still be used in unison with knowing a player's style of play in order to see the real basketball world consequences of the shots said player takes.

Also, use individual ORTG and USG together. I've found that it is a really good indicator of how well a player can play his role on a team.

[Paydro70]

I believe FG% is useful. TS% is clearly the superior measure of actual efficiency, but FG% can still be used in unison with knowing a player's style of play in order to see the real basketball world consequences of the shots said player takes.

Also, use individual ORTG and USG together. I've found that it is a really good indicator of how well a player can play his role on a team.

What does FG% do that eFG% doesn't do better? All that sort of thing will make you think is that 3pt shooters are a detriment instead of an asset. Unless you're making a convoluted rebounding argument...

[ronnymac2]

I believe FG% is useful. TS% is clearly the superior measure of actual efficiency, but FG% can still be used in unison with knowing a player's style of play in order to see the real basketball world consequences of the shots said player takes.

Also, use individual ORTG and USG together. I've found that it is a really good indicator of how well a player can play his role on a team.

What does FG% do that eFG% doesn't do better? All that sort of thing will make you think is that 3pt shooters are a detriment instead of an asset. Unless you're making a convoluted rebounding argument...

eFG% also does a better job at tracking efficiency than fg%. I'm not arguing that FG% is better than the other two stats if you're looking at a player's scoring efficiency.

But field goal percentage still gives you how good a player is at converting a field goal attempt on a random possession. Just making a shot vs. missing a shot.

Say two players never get to the free throw line (or are equal in free throw% and Foul Drawing). Assume they each average the same amount of points per game. One shots 50 percent from the field and doesn't attempt 3's. Another shoots 40 percent from the field but shoots 3's at such a percentage that it brings his eFG% equal with the first player at 50 percent. eFG% sees the same scorer. Correctly. But on the court, these two players are very different. If I've got an awesome half-court defense that I've built my team around, I want to make sure that I convert as many shots as possible so that the other team needs to take the ball out from the baseline. I'm taking the guy who shoots 50% from the field. If I'm a GM who has built my team around a post-up scorer who can lead a league-best offense, I'll probably take the floor-spacer, even though his field goal percentage is lower.

I'm not saying 3-point shooters should be penalized because their fg% isn't as high as the next guy who plays close to the basket and shoots 2-pointers all the time. But field goal percentage can be used as a differentiating tool . It can still be useful.


Again, I agree that in terms of simply measuring efficiency, TS% and eFG% are superior.