A History Lesson in Al Harrington aka "Free Candy"

[moocow007]

Just a few notes...

Aside from David Lee, Al Harrington had the highest shooting percentage of any of the Knick regulars (guys that played a good portion of the season).

Of all the Knicks (if you consider that Larry Hughes spent most of the season trying to get into shape) he is the most refined and proven offensive player.

NY plays in a system where offense wins or loses games (not defense) and which, once Duhon went down found their offense stagnate due to lack of a true floor general (Harrington is not a PG or Lebron James).

Just because Al Harrington isn't Lebron James in terms of passing doesn't mean he's shite either.

He is what he is and what he is and what he is is the Knicks best offensive player, on a team that is offensively geared and who missed terribly Duhon once he wore down. Yes, NY would be much better with Lebron but I would be much better making a million a year instead of what I'm actually making.

[VinnyTheMick]

He is what he is and what he is and what he is is the Knicks best offensive player.

My brain hurts.

[moocow007]

He is what he is and what he is and what he is is the Knicks best offensive player.

My brain hurts.

It should. It's a scary thing.

[NYKAL]

Just a few notes...

Aside from David Lee, Al Harrington had the highest shooting percentage of any of the Knick regulars (guys that played a good portion of the season).

Of all the Knicks (if you consider that Larry Hughes spent most of the season trying to get into shape) he is the most refined and proven offensive player.

NY plays in a system where offense wins or loses games (not defense) and which, once Duhon went down found their offense stagnate due to lack of a true floor general (Harrington is not a PG or Lebron James).

Just because Al Harrington isn't Lebron James in terms of passing doesn't mean he's **** either.

He is what he is and what he is and what he is is the Knicks best offensive player, on a team that is offensively geared and who missed terribly Duhon once he wore down. Yes, NY would be much better with Lebron but I would be much better making a million a year instead of what I'm actually making.

I have said it here, you stated it a few pages ago but, people still compare him to crawful and act say things like he's an inefficient player. They must be watching the Bizarro Knicks because this guy got it done with less minutes. Often coming off the bench.

[NYKnick87]

Just a few notes...

Aside from David Lee, Al Harrington had the highest shooting percentage of any of the Knick regulars (guys that played a good portion of the season).

Of all the Knicks (if you consider that Larry Hughes spent most of the season trying to get into shape) he is the most refined and proven offensive player.

NY plays in a system where offense wins or loses games (not defense) and which, once Duhon went down found their offense stagnate due to lack of a true floor general (Harrington is not a PG or Lebron James).

Just because Al Harrington isn't Lebron James in terms of passing doesn't mean he's **** either.

He is what he is and what he is and what he is is the Knicks best offensive player, on a team that is offensively geared and who missed terribly Duhon once he wore down. Yes, NY would be much better with Lebron but I would be much better making a million a year instead of what I'm actually making.

+1.

Wouldn't change a damn thing about your post.

[Alfred]

Chris Duhon actually had a higher TS% than Harrington. Same with David Lee. And Gallinari. Even Tim Thomas (when he was on the Knicks).

[NYKnick87]

Chris Duhon actually had a higher TS% than Harrington. Same with David Lee. And Gallinari. Even Tim Thomas (when he was on the Knicks).

Um...you might want to consider context...

Lee takes a majority of his shots around the basket.
Gallinari shouldn't even be in this discussion based on sample size. Ditto for TT.

Duhon has a higher TS% than Kobe and Dirk, so what does that imply? Nothing. Duhon's TS% is helped by the fact that he connected on a greater percentage of his 3pt attempts and shot a higher percentage from the line. Duhon doesn't play the role of primary scorer on this team, so the degree of difficulty on his shots are not comparable to the shots taken by Al. Al is pretty much doing the heavy lifting for us on offense and although he may take some bad shots now and then, it's just something we have to put up with. Unless, of course, he starts shooting in the low 40s.

[moocow007]

Just a few notes...

Aside from David Lee, Al Harrington had the highest shooting percentage of any of the Knick regulars (guys that played a good portion of the season).

Of all the Knicks (if you consider that Larry Hughes spent most of the season trying to get into shape) he is the most refined and proven offensive player.

NY plays in a system where offense wins or loses games (not defense) and which, once Duhon went down found their offense stagnate due to lack of a true floor general (Harrington is not a PG or Lebron James).

Just because Al Harrington isn't Lebron James in terms of passing doesn't mean he's **** either.

He is what he is and what he is and what he is is the Knicks best offensive player, on a team that is offensively geared and who missed terribly Duhon once he wore down. Yes, NY would be much better with Lebron but I would be much better making a million a year instead of what I'm actually making.

I have said it here, you stated it a few pages ago but, people still compare him to crawful and act say things like he's an inefficient player. They must be watching the Bizarro Knicks because this guy got it done with less minutes. Often coming off the bench.

Yeah I really don't understand the hate. They get on him for the net hanging thing that may have cost the Knicks a couple games but they'd have not even been in those games if not for Harrington...which is the really funny part. Maybe they're upset with him for not hanging on the net and blowing every game so the Knicks could have had a better shot at the 1st overall pick?

And maybe it's because of the thoughts of Lebron James fairies dancing in our heads but just because he's not a perfect (which he's far from and yet seems to be what people are expecting him to be) he must be terrible. It's either great or terrible for most people apparently.

What also is funny is that Harrington always plays with a lot of passion, doesn't back down and is often the only Knick that tries to push back when the other team makes their move (instead of throwing in the towel and folding like has been common during the Larry Brown and Isiah Thomas era)...things that you would think normally are positives especially for new yorkers...and yet isn't appreciated for that.

[Alfred]

Chris Duhon actually had a higher TS% than Harrington. Same with David Lee. And Gallinari. Even Tim Thomas (when he was on the Knicks).

Um...you might want to consider context...

Lee takes a majority of his shots around the basket.
Gallinari shouldn't even be in this discussion based on sample size. Ditto for TT.

Duhon has a higher TS% than Kobe and Dirk, so what does that imply? Nothing. Duhon's TS% is helped by the fact that he connected on a greater percentage of his 3pt attempts and shot a higher percentage from the line. Duhon doesn't play the role of primary scorer on this team, so the degree of difficulty on his shots are not comparable to the shots taken by Al. Al is pretty much doing the heavy lifting for us on offense and although he may take some bad shots now and then, it's just something we have to put up with. Unless, of course, he starts shooting in the low 40s.

I was actually disputing his "Al Harrington has the highest FG% of any of the Knicks regulars other than David Lee". While that is true, FG% isn't the best measure of efficiency, TS% is. That was the gyst of his argument: Harrington isn't just a chucker.

Duhon's TS% is helped by the fact that he connected on a greater percentage of his 3pt attempts and shot a higher percentage from the line.

Yes of course that will help his efficiency. Putting the ball into the basket more often will do that sort of thing.

Unless, of course, he starts shooting in the low 40s.

Who cares about FG%? It's basically irrelivant.

[NYKnick87]

I was actually disputing his "Al Harrington has the highest FG% of any of the Knicks regulars other than David Lee". While that is true, FG% isn't the best measure of efficiency, TS% is. That was the gyst of his argument: Harrington isn't just a chucker.

Yes of course that will help his efficiency. Putting the ball into the basket more often will do that sort of thing.

Regulars - i.e. NOT Gallo, or Tim Thomas. So again, bringing them into your original post was completely unnecessary. And yes, TS% is a better measure of efficiency than FG%, but once again, you're ignoring context. In my previous post, I stated that Duhon has a higher TS% than both Dirk and Kobe, which means absolutely nothing because you're not going to arrive at any type of useful conclusion regarding offensive efficiency using TS% as a point of comparison between those players. Dirk and Kobe both are responsible for the lion's share of the offense of their respective teams whereas Duhon is just a facilitator. Al Harrington is our primary offensive weapon and comparing his TS% with Duhon's without considering his role in the offense or the shots he takes is just stupid.

Who cares about FG%? It's basically irrelivant.

Um, not at all. Raw FG% is definitely not irrelevant. You obviously don't understand the use of certain statistics. Here's what tsherkin posted in regards to the usefulness of FG%:

FG% is a valuable measure for evaluating people in some ways. Given the volume of 3s he took, the "efficiency" of his shooting is relative; this is the Iverson argument, only with 3s AND FTAs instead of just FTAs. High-volume, low-raw FG% chuckery is still a problem, especially when the 3P% isn't spectacular.

Look at it this way; in 06-07, he had 32 games where he played 30+ minutes and shot under 40%. He had 21 games over 48%. He was a streaky guy; when he was on, he could shoot you out of a hole, but when he wasn't, he'd put you into one.

In those 32 games, he MISSED an average of 14.2 shots a game while taking an average of 20.4.

Regardless of whether he hit his threes or not (he shot 23.2% from downtown in those games on about 7.7 3PA/g), he was still missing left, right and center. Not all of those misses were rebounded by the Wizards.

When you're primarily a perimeter shooter, raw FG% matters. Arenas drives, and he draws fouls (and because he's played mostly from 04-05 forward, he's drawn fouls very well for a wing), but it would be a mistake to only look at eFG% and TS% to evaluate his efficiency.

BULK FG-missed still represent a problem.

[moocow007]

Chris Duhon actually had a higher TS% than Harrington. Same with David Lee. And Gallinari. Even Tim Thomas (when he was on the Knicks).

Um...you might want to consider context...

Lee takes a majority of his shots around the basket.
Gallinari shouldn't even be in this discussion based on sample size. Ditto for TT.

Duhon has a higher TS% than Kobe and Dirk, so what does that imply? Nothing. Duhon's TS% is helped by the fact that he connected on a greater percentage of his 3pt attempts and shot a higher percentage from the line. Duhon doesn't play the role of primary scorer on this team, so the degree of difficulty on his shots are not comparable to the shots taken by Al. Al is pretty much doing the heavy lifting for us on offense and although he may take some bad shots now and then, it's just something we have to put up with. Unless, of course, he starts shooting in the low 40s.

I was actually disputing his "Al Harrington has the highest FG% of any of the Knicks regulars other than David Lee". While that is true, FG% isn't the best measure of efficiency, TS% is. That was the gyst of his argument: Harrington isn't just a chucker.

Duhon's TS% is helped by the fact that he connected on a greater percentage of his 3pt attempts and shot a higher percentage from the line.

Yes of course that will help his efficiency. Putting the ball into the basket more often will do that sort of thing.

Unless, of course, he starts shooting in the low 40s.

Who cares about FG%? It's basically irrelivant.

It is? So Jamal Crawford didn't deserve the "Chuckford" label?

Harrington had a TS% of .547 as a Knick which is the highest of his career (and a respectable percentage) which should count for something especially since the hate is about his time in a Knick uniform.

TS% also favors guys who shoots 3's well (which pumps up the points portion of the formula relative to FGA...resulting in higher percentages) or that scores near the basket (which decreases the FGA portion of the calculation relative to points...also resulting in higher percentages). It also favors guys who are lucky enough to be placed in the right roles or are not asked to carry offensive loads on poor teams. NONE of that is Harrington. In fact the fact that Harrington's TS% is higher during his time in GS as well as NY shows the impact of the right system compared to a player's skills is to this stat.

Here's the list of the top 25 players in terms of TS%:

1 Erick Dampier
2 Solomon Jones
3 Joel Przybilla
4 Nene
5 Carl Landry
6 Ray Allen
7 Shaquille O'Neal
8 Yao Ming
9 Pau Gasol
10 Amare Stoudemire
11 James Singleton
12 Steve Nash
13 Troy Murphy
14 Jose Calderon
15 Jameer Nelson
16 Matt Bonner
17 Amir Johnson
18 Chris Andersen
19 Steve Novak
20 Kevin Martin
21 Dwight Howard
22 Chris Paul
23 Greg Oden
24 Craig Smith
25 Nick Collison

What you have is either: a) great post players, b) great 3-point shooters, or c) guys that are limited in their offensive roles who rarely are asked to shoot and who really only scores when they are looking at wide open baskets (the Solomon Jones', Matt Bonner's, Amir Johnson's, James Singleton's of the word). But, again, none of that is what Harrington is or has been asked to be (mostly with great reasons).

TS% is an interesting stat, but it's by no means a end all be all of how good a offensive player is (which is what is the gist of this thread) or whether he deserves to be called a chucker (also what this thread is arguing). In fact, TS% actually helps Harrington since his TS% as a Knick was actually not bad at all.

[Alfred]

I was actually disputing his "Al Harrington has the highest FG% of any of the Knicks regulars other than David Lee". While that is true, FG% isn't the best measure of efficiency, TS% is. That was the gyst of his argument: Harrington isn't just a chucker.

Yes of course that will help his efficiency. Putting the ball into the basket more often will do that sort of thing.

Regulars - i.e. NOT Gallo, or Tim Thomas. So again, bringing them into your original post was completely unnecessary. And yes, TS% is a better measure of efficiency than FG%, but once again, you're ignoring context. In my previous post, I stated that Duhon has a higher TS% than both Dirk and Kobe, which means absolutely nothing because you're not going to arrive at any type of useful conclusion regarding offensive efficiency using TS% as a point of comparison between those players. Dirk and Kobe both are responsible for the lion's share of the offense of their respective teams whereas Duhon is just a facilitator. Al Harrington is our primary offensive weapon and comparing his TS% with Duhon's without considering his role in the offense or the shots he takes is just stupid.

Duhon is a more efficient scorer than Dirk or Kobe. Does that mean that he is as GOOD a scorer as Dirk or Kobe? No. He puts up more points per possession than Kobe or Dirk do. When you are talking about FG%, and you use it to justify his efficiency, TS% is simply the better way of doing it.

Al Harrington may be a good #1 option on your team, but to state that he was also the most efficient (which I think is what moo was trying to get at) isn't actually the case. When you said "that's because he was better at shooting the three and free throws" illustrates my point. That matters.

Who cares about FG%? It's basically irrelivant.

Um, not at all. Raw FG% is definitely not irrelevant. You obviously don't understand the use of certain statistics. Here's what tsherkin posted in regards to the usefulness of FG%:

FG% is a valuable measure for evaluating people in some ways. Given the volume of 3s he took, the "efficiency" of his shooting is relative; this is the Iverson argument, only with 3s AND FTAs instead of just FTAs. High-volume, low-raw FG% chuckery is still a problem, especially when the 3P% isn't spectacular.

Look at it this way; in 06-07, he had 32 games where he played 30+ minutes and shot under 40%. He had 21 games over 48%. He was a streaky guy; when he was on, he could shoot you out of a hole, but when he wasn't, he'd put you into one.

In those 32 games, he MISSED an average of 14.2 shots a game while taking an average of 20.4.

Regardless of whether he hit his threes or not (he shot 23.2% from downtown in those games on about 7.7 3PA/g), he was still missing left, right and center. Not all of those misses were rebounded by the Wizards.

When you're primarily a perimeter shooter, raw FG% matters. Arenas drives, and he draws fouls (and because he's played mostly from 04-05 forward, he's drawn fouls very well for a wing), but it would be a mistake to only look at eFG% and TS% to evaluate his efficiency.

BULK FG-missed still represent a problem.

I know TSherkin quite well, and have spoken with him many times about many different issues, and I completely disagree with what he is saying here. FG% as a relevant statistic has essentially been replaced by eFG and TS%.The Arenas "streakiness" argument can totally be accounted for by either TS% or eFG. TS% is essentially a points per possession stat, where all of the possessions you "use" are counted, and you recieve an aggregate score based on those possessions represented as a percentage. It would be completely appropriate to look at TS% in the Arenas scenario. Why not? That's not an argument for FG% over TS%.

[moocow007]

For anyone that is wondering "wtf is TS%", it's an abbreviation for "True Shooting Percentage". It's calculated based on the following formula:

POINTS / (2 * (FGA + 0.44 * FTA))

So if you score a lot of points per field goal attempt or are very efficient in your all around shooting, the TS% will be high.

For the top 3 point shooters this is because the POINTS will be higher relative to FGA.

For the top post players this is because the FGA will be lower relative to the POINTS.

It does not require that you score a lot of points as shooting a lot works against you. Which is why you see Erick Dampier tops on the list and a guy like Solomon Jones (yeah who?) also tops on the list. If you never really shoot with the exception of wide open putbacks then you'll likely also have a great TS%.

[Alfred]

Um...you might want to consider context...

Lee takes a majority of his shots around the basket.
Gallinari shouldn't even be in this discussion based on sample size. Ditto for TT.

Duhon has a higher TS% than Kobe and Dirk, so what does that imply? Nothing. Duhon's TS% is helped by the fact that he connected on a greater percentage of his 3pt attempts and shot a higher percentage from the line. Duhon doesn't play the role of primary scorer on this team, so the degree of difficulty on his shots are not comparable to the shots taken by Al. Al is pretty much doing the heavy lifting for us on offense and although he may take some bad shots now and then, it's just something we have to put up with. Unless, of course, he starts shooting in the low 40s.

I was actually disputing his "Al Harrington has the highest FG% of any of the Knicks regulars other than David Lee". While that is true, FG% isn't the best measure of efficiency, TS% is. That was the gyst of his argument: Harrington isn't just a chucker.

Duhon's TS% is helped by the fact that he connected on a greater percentage of his 3pt attempts and shot a higher percentage from the line.

Yes of course that will help his efficiency. Putting the ball into the basket more often will do that sort of thing.

Unless, of course, he starts shooting in the low 40s.

Who cares about FG%? It's basically irrelivant.

It is? So Jamal Crawford didn't deserve the "Chuckford" label?

Harrington had a TS% of .547 as a Knick which is the highest of his career (and a respectable percentage) which should count for something especially since the hate is about his time in a Knick uniform.

TS% also favors guys who shoots 3's well or that scores near the basket (which is why most of the top guys on the list are either guys who make their living near the basket...which naturally results in higher FG% and, therefore, better efficiency...or that are deadly 3 point shooters...since the points used in the TS% are high to begin with). It also favors guys who are lucky enough to be placed in the right roles or are not asked to carry offensive loads on poor teams. NONE of that is Harrington. In fact the fact that Harrington's TS% is higher during his time in GS as well as NY shows the impact of the right system compared to a player's skills is to this stat.

Here's the list of the top 25 players in terms of TS%:

1 Erick Dampier
2 Solomon Jones
3 Joel Przybilla
4 Nene
5 Carl Landry
6 Ray Allen
7 Shaquille O'Neal
8 Yao Ming
9 Pau Gasol
10 Amare Stoudemire
11 James Singleton
12 Steve Nash
13 Troy Murphy
14 Jose Calderon
15 Jameer Nelson
16 Matt Bonner
17 Amir Johnson
18 Chris Andersen
19 Steve Novak
20 Kevin Martin
21 Dwight Howard
22 Chris Paul
23 Greg Oden
24 Craig Smith
25 Nick Collison

What you have is either: a) great post players, b) great 3-point shooters, or c) guys that are limited in their offensive roles who rarely are asked to shoot and who really only scores when they are looking at wide open baskets (the Solomon Jones', Matt Bonner's, Amir Johnson's, James Singleton's of the word). But, again, none of that is what Harrington is or has been asked to be (mostly with great reasons).

TS% doesn't "favour" anyone, unless they put the ball into the basket efficiently. Ideally, you want to put the ball into the hands of the person that can both create a shot (evidenced by how many shots they take) as well as the person that can put the ball into the basket as efficiently as possible.

You yourself tried to use FG% as a metric to evaluate Al Harrington. Let's take a look at who lead that category. It's EVEN MORE biased; towards post players. Of course you want to add threes and freethrows into your evaluations. Of course it's still going to put guys who don't take a lot of shots near the top, because those guys aren't asked to bear the offensive load, or create difficult shots for themselves, but let's not pretend that TS% doesn't matter. Chuckers and terrible players shoot poor TS%s, and efficient/good players shoot good TS%s.

If you're using FG% to evaluate Al's play, I really don't understand why you would be against using TS% to evaluate him.

[moocow007]

It is? So Jamal Crawford didn't deserve the "Chuckford" label?

Harrington had a TS% of .547 as a Knick which is the highest of his career (and a respectable percentage) which should count for something especially since the hate is about his time in a Knick uniform.

TS% also favors guys who shoots 3's well or that scores near the basket (which is why most of the top guys on the list are either guys who make their living near the basket...which naturally results in higher FG% and, therefore, better efficiency...or that are deadly 3 point shooters...since the points used in the TS% are high to begin with). It also favors guys who are lucky enough to be placed in the right roles or are not asked to carry offensive loads on poor teams. NONE of that is Harrington. In fact the fact that Harrington's TS% is higher during his time in GS as well as NY shows the impact of the right system compared to a player's skills is to this stat.

Here's the list of the top 25 players in terms of TS%:

1 Erick Dampier
2 Solomon Jones
3 Joel Przybilla
4 Nene
5 Carl Landry
6 Ray Allen
7 Shaquille O'Neal
8 Yao Ming
9 Pau Gasol
10 Amare Stoudemire
11 James Singleton
12 Steve Nash
13 Troy Murphy
14 Jose Calderon
15 Jameer Nelson
16 Matt Bonner
17 Amir Johnson
18 Chris Andersen
19 Steve Novak
20 Kevin Martin
21 Dwight Howard
22 Chris Paul
23 Greg Oden
24 Craig Smith
25 Nick Collison

What you have is either: a) great post players, b) great 3-point shooters, or c) guys that are limited in their offensive roles who rarely are asked to shoot and who really only scores when they are looking at wide open baskets (the Solomon Jones', Matt Bonner's, Amir Johnson's, James Singleton's of the word). But, again, none of that is what Harrington is or has been asked to be (mostly with great reasons).

TS% doesn't "favour" anyone, unless they put the ball into the basket efficiently. Ideally, you want to put the ball into the hands of the person that can both create a shot (evidenced by how many shots they take) as well as the person that can put the ball into the basket as efficiently as possible.

You yourself tried to use FG% as a metric to evaluate Al Harrington. Let's take a look at who lead that category. It's EVEN MORE biased; towards post players. OF course you want to add threes and freethrows into your evaluations. Of course it's still going to favour guys who don't take a lot of shots, because those guys aren't asked to bear the offensive load, or create difficult shots for themselves, but let's not pretend that TS% doesn't matter. Chuckers and terrible players shoot poor TS%s, and efficient/good players shoot good TS%s.

If you're using FG% to evaluate Al's play, I really don't understand why you would be against using TS% to evaluate him.

I'm actually not against it. As I pointed out, Harrington's .547 TS% as a Knick is actually not bad.

But even if FG% is even more favorable to post players (and it is), the use of TS% as a stat has to be used responsibly. It reallyd does not validate how "good an offensive player" a player is (for the reasons I mentioned). What it does show is who is most efficient in scoring when given the opportunity to score. That really doesn't apply to the Harrington argument going on here.

[Alfred]

Okay, because you think that TS% is biased, here is the list of players who have the highest FG% (a stat that you used to evaluate Al):

http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/Fi ... 1&splitDD=

[Alfred]

It is? So Jamal Crawford didn't deserve the "Chuckford" label?

Harrington had a TS% of .547 as a Knick which is the highest of his career (and a respectable percentage) which should count for something especially since the hate is about his time in a Knick uniform.

TS% also favors guys who shoots 3's well or that scores near the basket (which is why most of the top guys on the list are either guys who make their living near the basket...which naturally results in higher FG% and, therefore, better efficiency...or that are deadly 3 point shooters...since the points used in the TS% are high to begin with). It also favors guys who are lucky enough to be placed in the right roles or are not asked to carry offensive loads on poor teams. NONE of that is Harrington. In fact the fact that Harrington's TS% is higher during his time in GS as well as NY shows the impact of the right system compared to a player's skills is to this stat.

Here's the list of the top 25 players in terms of TS%:

1 Erick Dampier
2 Solomon Jones
3 Joel Przybilla
4 Nene
5 Carl Landry
6 Ray Allen
7 Shaquille O'Neal
8 Yao Ming
9 Pau Gasol
10 Amare Stoudemire
11 James Singleton
12 Steve Nash
13 Troy Murphy
14 Jose Calderon
15 Jameer Nelson
16 Matt Bonner
17 Amir Johnson
18 Chris Andersen
19 Steve Novak
20 Kevin Martin
21 Dwight Howard
22 Chris Paul
23 Greg Oden
24 Craig Smith
25 Nick Collison

What you have is either: a) great post players, b) great 3-point shooters, or c) guys that are limited in their offensive roles who rarely are asked to shoot and who really only scores when they are looking at wide open baskets (the Solomon Jones', Matt Bonner's, Amir Johnson's, James Singleton's of the word). But, again, none of that is what Harrington is or has been asked to be (mostly with great reasons).

TS% doesn't "favour" anyone, unless they put the ball into the basket efficiently. Ideally, you want to put the ball into the hands of the person that can both create a shot (evidenced by how many shots they take) as well as the person that can put the ball into the basket as efficiently as possible.

You yourself tried to use FG% as a metric to evaluate Al Harrington. Let's take a look at who lead that category. It's EVEN MORE biased; towards post players. OF course you want to add threes and freethrows into your evaluations. Of course it's still going to favour guys who don't take a lot of shots, because those guys aren't asked to bear the offensive load, or create difficult shots for themselves, but let's not pretend that TS% doesn't matter. Chuckers and terrible players shoot poor TS%s, and efficient/good players shoot good TS%s.

If you're using FG% to evaluate Al's play, I really don't understand why you would be against using TS% to evaluate him.

I'm actually not against it. As I pointed out, Harrington's .547 TS% as a Knick is actually not bad.

But even if FG% is even more favorable to post players (and it is), the use of TS% as a stat has to be used responsibly. It reallyd does not validate how "good an offensive player" a player is (for the reasons I mentioned). What it does show is who is most efficient in scoring when given the opportunity to score. That really doesn't apply to the Harrington argument going on here.

But then why does FG% apply here?