TS% vs FG%

Moderator: Doctor MJ

User avatar
Rapcity_11
RealGM
Posts: 24,490
And1: 9,530
Joined: Jul 26, 2006
     

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#41 » by Rapcity_11 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:49 pm

fallacy wrote:As an overall measure of a players efficiency

ts% > eFg% > fg%

As a measurement of how good a shooter is from the field (not the free throw line)

eFg% > fg% > ts%


Still waiting for you to point out what value FG% has? (And not an explanation of what it is)
User avatar
fallacy
RealGM
Posts: 10,496
And1: 607
Joined: Jan 11, 2010
       

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#42 » by fallacy » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:50 pm

Rapcity_11 wrote:
fallacy wrote:As an overall measure of a players efficiency

ts% > eFg% > fg%

As a measurement of how good a shooter is from the field (not the free throw line)

eFg% > fg% > ts%


Still waiting for you to point out what value FG% has? (And not an explanation of what it is)


As an individual metric, not as an overall metric. If that makes any sense.
**** Ron Artest
**** Marco Belinelli
Stephen Jackson aint bout dis lyfe
Patrick Beverly deserves to have his knee ripped to pieces
User avatar
Rapcity_11
RealGM
Posts: 24,490
And1: 9,530
Joined: Jul 26, 2006
     

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#43 » by Rapcity_11 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:52 pm

fallacy wrote:
As an individual metric, not as an overall metric. If that makes any sense.


Not really. Can you expand?
User avatar
fallacy
RealGM
Posts: 10,496
And1: 607
Joined: Jan 11, 2010
       

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#44 » by fallacy » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:55 pm

Rapcity_11 wrote:
fallacy wrote:
As an individual metric, not as an overall metric. If that makes any sense.


Not really. Can you expand?


If you want to know if a player is a good mid range shooter, ts% and eFg% become worthless and fg% is the only real way to measure that.

If you want to know if a player is a good finisher at the rim you have to use fg% because eFg% is only a valid stat if you include threes and ts% is only valid if you include threes and free throws (which are obviously not included if you only measure shots at the rim)

If you want to know if a player is a good overall shooter, ts% and eFg% become a much better way to measure that.
**** Ron Artest
**** Marco Belinelli
Stephen Jackson aint bout dis lyfe
Patrick Beverly deserves to have his knee ripped to pieces
User avatar
Rapcity_11
RealGM
Posts: 24,490
And1: 9,530
Joined: Jul 26, 2006
     

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#45 » by Rapcity_11 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:58 pm

fallacy wrote:
Rapcity_11 wrote:
fallacy wrote:
As an individual metric, not as an overall metric. If that makes any sense.


Not really. Can you expand?


If you want to know if a player is a good mid range shooter, ts% and eFg% become worthless and fg% is the only real way to measure that.

If you want to know if a player is a good finisher at the rim you have to use fg% because eFg% is only a valid stat if you include threes and ts% is only valid if you include threes and free throws.

If you want to know if a player is a good overall shooter, ts% and eFg% become a much better way to measure that.


You seem to be changing your tune from earlier when you were quoting Harden's FG%. My point all along was that it's entirely pointless to even look at it.

So it now seems that you agree that FG% is only useful when looking a shot distribution charts?

By the way, eFG% is valid with or without 3's. It'll just end up the same as FG% if a player doesn't take 3's.
User avatar
fallacy
RealGM
Posts: 10,496
And1: 607
Joined: Jan 11, 2010
       

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#46 » by fallacy » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:02 pm

Rapcity_11 wrote:
fallacy wrote:
Rapcity_11 wrote:
Not really. Can you expand?


If you want to know if a player is a good mid range shooter, ts% and eFg% become worthless and fg% is the only real way to measure that.

If you want to know if a player is a good finisher at the rim you have to use fg% because eFg% is only a valid stat if you include threes and ts% is only valid if you include threes and free throws.

If you want to know if a player is a good overall shooter, ts% and eFg% become a much better way to measure that.


You seem to be changing your tune from earlier when you were quoting Harden's FG%. My point all along was that it's entirely pointless to even look at it.

So it now seems that you agree that FG% is only useful when looking a shot distribution charts?

By the way, eFG% is valid with or without 3's. It'll just end up the same as FG% if a player doesn't take 3's.


eFg% without threes is just fg%, so yeah.

I never said that fg% was better than ts% or eFg%, but fg% isn't worthless when used correctly
**** Ron Artest
**** Marco Belinelli
Stephen Jackson aint bout dis lyfe
Patrick Beverly deserves to have his knee ripped to pieces
User avatar
Rapcity_11
RealGM
Posts: 24,490
And1: 9,530
Joined: Jul 26, 2006
     

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#47 » by Rapcity_11 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:14 pm

fallacy wrote:
I never said that fg% was better than ts% or eFg%, but fg% isn't worthless when used correctly


When is it used correctly? You keep evading specifics.
tsherkin
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 78,346
And1: 19,900
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#48 » by tsherkin » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:31 pm

EvanZ wrote:Say you're down by 1 with the last possession, do you give it to the guy with the highest eFG% every time?


No, I look at the play and decide if I want a 3 or a mid-range J and plan accordingly. FG% isn't a useful indicator there, and in position to make that decision, I already know which player has what skills.


Say You have two players with the same eFG%, but one has a higher FG%. Does that inform your choice between the two?


No, not really, which is why I said zone-specific FG% is more important.
User avatar
EvanZ
RealGM
Posts: 12,640
And1: 3,181
Joined: Apr 06, 2011

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#49 » by EvanZ » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:43 pm

tsherkin wrote:
EvanZ wrote:Say you're down by 1 with the last possession, do you give it to the guy with the highest eFG% every time?


No, I look at the play and decide if I want a 3 or a mid-range J and plan accordingly. FG% isn't a useful indicator there, and in position to make that decision, I already know which player has what skills.


Say You have two players with the same eFG%, but one has a higher FG%. Does that inform your choice between the two?


No, not really, which is why I said zone-specific FG% is more important.


Then apparently the whole eFG% vs. FG% "debate" is just a red herring. Thank you for making my point for me.
I was right about 3 point shooting. I expect to be right about Tacko Fall. Some coach will figure out how to use Tacko Fall. This movement towards undersized centers will sweep ng back. Back to the basket scorers will return to the NBA.
User avatar
Rapcity_11
RealGM
Posts: 24,490
And1: 9,530
Joined: Jul 26, 2006
     

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#50 » by Rapcity_11 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:56 pm

EvanZ wrote:
Then apparently the whole eFG% vs. FG% "debate" is just a red herring. Thank you for making my point for me.


Uh, no it's not.

Any analysis of metrics should be done within the context of the entirety of basketball analysis.

There is literally no point in doing an isolated look at FG vs eFG.
User avatar
Hendrix
RealGM
Posts: 17,030
And1: 3,662
Joined: May 30, 2007
Location: London, Ontario

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#51 » by Hendrix » Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:07 pm

mysticbb wrote:As Evan wanted to point out, the information about FG% or eFG% can be used to gain information about the player type. Such things can be very useful in order to determine the overall value a player can have to a team success. It should be part of the player evaluation to understand how a player acts on the court, and the different shooting stats can help you by that.

I think there are better, and more useful ways to do that.

Rapcity_11 wrote:
Hendrix wrote:It's flawed in the sense that it doesn't accurately tell you how efficient a player is. Ft's count as possessions. Obviously it makes no attempt to do so, so it is not flawed if used in the proper context; however, I'm not really sure why anyone ever would want to use a context for scoring where you arn't trying to determine how efficient the player is in the totality of their scoring.


Judging how efficient a player is by EFG% is kind of like the reverse of judging how efficient a player is based on their ft%. Obviously EFG% is going to be closer to the truth as players tend to take more fga's than fta's. However both ft% and efg% omit a big portion of game.


No, all this means is your interpretation of it is wrong. It's not meant to be an all encompassing measure of efficiency. It's only supposed to make up for the added value of the 3 point shot. It's just one of many tools that should be used in player evaluation.


Re-read the bolded section. My interpretation is fine.

I'm saying that it is flawed stat for what most people use it for. Aka, to say how efficient a player is. If you go to the player comparison board and see someone state that player x is more efficient than player y, because player x's eFG% is higher, they would be using an imperfect stat to determine that. Yes, there is a context where it is appropriate, and not flawed; however, I don't think that context is all that useful.

I suppose it is a misnomer to say that eFG% itself is flawed. I think the way it is generally used by most people is flawed , and think the proper context to use it in is not all that important, thus I don't think the stat has all that much value.
oak2455 wrote:Do understand English???
User avatar
Rapcity_11
RealGM
Posts: 24,490
And1: 9,530
Joined: Jul 26, 2006
     

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#52 » by Rapcity_11 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:10 pm

Hendrix wrote:Re-read the bolded section. My interpretation is fine.

I'm saying that it is flawed stat for what most people use it for. Aka, to say how efficient a player is. Yes, there is a context where it is appropriate, and not flawed; however, I don't think that context is all that useful.


Which all points to it not being flawed!

Just because some people interpret it incorrectly doesn't make it flawed.
User avatar
Hendrix
RealGM
Posts: 17,030
And1: 3,662
Joined: May 30, 2007
Location: London, Ontario

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#53 » by Hendrix » Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:13 pm

Rapcity_11 wrote:Which all points to it not being flawed!

Just because some people interpret it incorrectly doesn't make it flawed.

I edited my last post, at the same time you posted this.
oak2455 wrote:Do understand English???
User avatar
EvanZ
RealGM
Posts: 12,640
And1: 3,181
Joined: Apr 06, 2011

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#54 » by EvanZ » Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:15 pm

Rapcity_11 wrote:
EvanZ wrote:
Then apparently the whole eFG% vs. FG% "debate" is just a red herring. Thank you for making my point for me.


Uh, no it's not.

Any analysis of metrics should be done within the context of the entirety of basketball analysis.

There is literally no point in doing an isolated look at FG vs eFG.


We agree on this last point. So what is this thread about anyway?
I was right about 3 point shooting. I expect to be right about Tacko Fall. Some coach will figure out how to use Tacko Fall. This movement towards undersized centers will sweep ng back. Back to the basket scorers will return to the NBA.
User avatar
Rapcity_11
RealGM
Posts: 24,490
And1: 9,530
Joined: Jul 26, 2006
     

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#55 » by Rapcity_11 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:19 pm

Hendrix wrote:
Rapcity_11 wrote:Which all points to it not being flawed!

Just because some people interpret it incorrectly doesn't make it flawed.

I edited my last post, at the same time you posted this.


:D

Sorry man, I just like to argue. Go Raps lol.
User avatar
Rapcity_11
RealGM
Posts: 24,490
And1: 9,530
Joined: Jul 26, 2006
     

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#56 » by Rapcity_11 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:23 pm

EvanZ wrote:
Rapcity_11 wrote:
EvanZ wrote:
Then apparently the whole eFG% vs. FG% "debate" is just a red herring. Thank you for making my point for me.


Uh, no it's not.

Any analysis of metrics should be done within the context of the entirety of basketball analysis.

There is literally no point in doing an isolated look at FG vs eFG.


We agree on this last point. So what is this thread about anyway?


Comparing shooting efficiency metrics within the context of basketball analysis!
mysticbb
Banned User
Posts: 8,205
And1: 713
Joined: May 28, 2007
Contact:
   

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#57 » by mysticbb » Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:11 pm

Hendrix wrote:I think there are better, and more useful ways to do that.


Well, those "better and more useful ways" may not always be available. Also, a couple of numbers and the ability to recognize a pattern might be a quicker way.
Obviously, without having any understanding what those numbers mean (and what kind of oncourt action they are implying), no number will have any meaning (or value). Which somehow makes most of the discussion rather pointless. Evan just pointed out some facts, and by that, he pointed to information we can derive by looking at things like FG%, eFG%, etc. pp.
User avatar
Hendrix
RealGM
Posts: 17,030
And1: 3,662
Joined: May 30, 2007
Location: London, Ontario

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#58 » by Hendrix » Thu Nov 22, 2012 5:42 am

mysticbb wrote:Well, those "better and more useful ways" may not always be available.

Like when? If I was stuck in the woods, and had nothing but a list of players & their respective fg%'s?

Also, a couple of numbers and the ability to recognize a pattern might be a quicker way.

I doubt you would be able to develop any kind of decent R^2. And, if you are taking the time to run regression analysis that might produce a loose relationship, you might as well be spending that time simply looking up the readily available data imo.

Obviously, without having any understanding what those numbers mean (and what kind of oncourt action they are implying), no number will have any meaning (or value). Which somehow makes most of the discussion rather pointless. Evan just pointed out some facts, and by that, he pointed to information we can derive by looking at things like FG%, eFG%, etc. pp.


I do not see any "facts". I've seen a hypothesis that there might be a loose relationship that we could potentially infer some information about a player. That is not really what I would call a fact. And, even if it were, I do not find that information derived to be all that useful.
oak2455 wrote:Do understand English???
mysticbb
Banned User
Posts: 8,205
And1: 713
Joined: May 28, 2007
Contact:
   

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#59 » by mysticbb » Thu Nov 22, 2012 7:27 am

Hendrix wrote:Like when?


Historic data or other leagues for example?

And making a judgement based on your personal beliefs is rather ... pointless. ;)
User avatar
Hendrix
RealGM
Posts: 17,030
And1: 3,662
Joined: May 30, 2007
Location: London, Ontario

Re: TS% vs FG% 

Post#60 » by Hendrix » Thu Nov 22, 2012 8:48 am

mysticbb wrote:Historic data or other leagues for example?

And making a judgement based on your personal beliefs is rather ... pointless. ;)

You just said.

Evan just pointed out some facts, and by that, he pointed to information we can derive by looking at things like FG%, eFG%, etc. pp.

How do you know that we can derive this information? How do you know how accurate the information is? You didn't bother to comment on any of my comments about the strength of the correlation or anything, so I'm going to assume you have no math to back this statement up, and are making this judgment based on your own belief.

Unless I saw some math to back it up, there is no way I would feel comfortable making any sort of conclusions about a player based on this. For example: player 'x' shoots 45fg% in 1993 in the ACB. First you'd need to determine the different league wide fg% averages for mid range shots, dunks, layups, hooks, 3's, etc.. to begin the analysis properly. And, I have a very hard time seeing it working out with any great correlation to the point where I'd actually feel comfortable using it in an analysis of a player.
oak2455 wrote:Do understand English???

Return to Statistical Analysis