Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 437

Thread: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

  1. #26

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    mattie, I agree with you. But you should play nice with wintermute. He is not baiting, he just disagrees.

    Guys with a high TS% are guys you want to get the ball to, if you are trying to generate points. It can be overdone, of course. Kobe, I believe, has a good TS%, but much of it is his being a black hole. A three can be a wasted possession, it can be a bad shot, but it doesn't have to be. An open 3 by a guy that shoots as well as Danny does is a very good shot. A post up by a guy like Danny that results in FT's is a good play. Both of these generate positive TS% results.

    It is perhaps important to note that TS% shows that made 3's are better than made 2's. And that missed 3's are not better than made 2's. That 'and 1's' are a good thing. That getting fouled and getting FT's is good. All of these things are things coaches like, n'est pas?

    One more question. IIRC, the rebounds from 3's are easier for the offense to rebound than from 2. The defense walls out the offense near the basket, but the long rebound makes it past the wall and into the area where the offensive players can get to it.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to xIndyFan For This Useful Post:


  3. #27
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,756

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Because people need to watch the game. You're trying to measure something that potentially ignores the bigger picture. The stat is meaningless because watching the game will tell you what you need to know.... regardless of what that lone stat says.
    Stats quantify what the eye sees. Stats aren't misleading. They can be misrepresented and misinterrpreted, but they're not misleading.
    ďJust because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.Ē ― Ricky Gervais.

    What if someone from a school of business or management school were to ask, How did you do this? How did you get the Pacers turned around? Is there a general approach you've taken that can be summarized?

    Larry Bird: Yeah, patience.

  4. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  5. #28
    Member CoolHand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Central Indiana
    Posts
    313
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    I think the thread title should have been more something like, "Why TS% really shows...." (whatever it is that is being argued - I still haven't really figured it out)
    I came in here not knowing what TS% was, and looking for an explanation.
    I found a much better and precise explanation on wikipedia. It seems like a nice stat. Obviously there are nuances to consider with any stat, but it's still a nice stat in that it does SOMETHING to try to draw some comparisons between different types of shooters.

  6. #29
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,679

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eindar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Are long rebounds leading to transition buckets the fly in the ointment for TS%? Or has there been a metric to debunk that long shots lead to long rebounds and more opportunities for fast break points, which are typically the highest percentage shots you can take? Seems to me that the consensus is that a shot at the rim is the best shot you can take. A three pointer is the second best shot you can take, and a long jumper is the worst shot you can take, with limited exceptions for elite jumpshooters like Jarrett Jack and a circa-2004 Rip Hamilton. Has anyone tried to corrolate the distance at which teams shoot vs. the amount of fast break points they give up? I know there's going to be a lot of statistical noise in the sample, as some teams are more athletic, and so are better at getting back on defense than other teams. I just thought it would be an interesting exercise to determine if there's any truth to the argument that the 3 is a bad shot because a miss leads to a fast break.
    Well, we can try to correlate opponent fast-break PPG with 3 pointers attempted per game if we want so.

    Opponent fast break PPG -> http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat...ate=2013-06-20

    3 pointers attempted per game -> http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat...ate=2013-06-20

    The team that allowed the fewest opponent fast break PPG was us, the Pacers. Where did we rank in 3 pointers attempted per game? We were right at the middle at #16.

    The team that allowed the most opponent fast break PPG was Sacramento. Where did it rank in 3 pointers attempted? #10.

    Which was the team that attempted the fewest 3 pointers last year? It was Memphis by a big margin (hence my inside-inside comments). Where did Memphis rank in opponent fast break PPG? They were tied at #8 along with Denver and the LA Clippers.

    Which was the team that attempted the most 3 pointers last year? It was Houston. Where did Houston rank in opponent fast break PPG? They were at #25.

    New York was #2 in most 3 pointers attempted last year. Where did they rank in opponent fast break PPG? They were #4.

    Miami was #2 in opponent fast break PPG last year. Where did they rank in 3 pointers attempted? They were #6.

    So, in the cases of Miami, New York and Indiana there was no correlation at all. In the cases of Memphis and Sacramento there was some correlation. In the case of Houston it seems to be a significant correlation.

    All in all, it seems to vary. There are examples that indicate that there is no correlation at all and there are other examples that indicate that there is some correlation. We would probably need to look back into several years of these two statistical categories in order to make an educated guess on this subject.

    It's true that long-range shots generally produce more long rebounds than close-range shots. That's just physics. It's also true that those long rebounds can lead to fast breaks for the defensive team. However, those same long rebounds are easier to be offensively rebounded exactly because they are rebounded away from the rim and thus they ignore the defense's box outs. That's why I don't think that a consensus can exist in this subject. You just cannot predict accurately enough where the long rebound will land so it's almost a coin toss.

    It's similar with the argument of "crashing the boards vs transition defense", imo. There are more than one variables in it.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Nuntius For This Useful Post:


  8. #30
    Custom User Titleist
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pacer Purgatory Praying for Paul
    Posts
    3,584
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Yes, in a vacuum where every parameter of the original post is true, JOB should have been a visionary who should have been able to win championships here due to our volume of 3pt attempts and poor shooting percentage. Stan Van Gundy evolved into a coach who shared this vision and had far better personnel for this strategy could not win the title with it, and were not nearly as successful in the playoffs as many thought they should be.

    There is one portion of game flow that cannot be emphasized enough. While it is true that defensive rebounds after missed shots do not lead to extra possessions for the teams on defense, it DOES have another impact which is even more difficult to measure. The missed 3 is more likely to be damaging due to the likelihood that opposing teams will gain possession of the ball more quickly and with a higher likelihood of getting out in transition for better quality looks at the other end due to the 3pt team's defense not being able to fully get back.

    It was no accident that JOB screamed himself horse with his nearly maniacal "Push it! Push It!" when the Pacers were on offense. He wanted the Pacers to be able to counter the pace and possession quality advantage that opposing teams gained from the Pacers missed 3's. In turn, this led to poor quality shots due to having less ball and player movement and player fatigue causing players to both lose lift on their shots and having less energy to both get back AND play effective D and get defensive boards. It likely also led to more fouling on defense due to fatigue and lack of correct defensive positioning more frequently.

    While not having the weakness of "confirmation bias" (tendency to pay attention to and remember that which supports our own beliefs whether those beliefs accurately reflect reality or not), statistics and the subsequent metrics that they feed are necessarily flawed due to the inability to both measure every single variable of a given situation, then determining whether each variable is dependent or independent in every single possible causal relationship system. Basketball, broken down to these terms, is an incredibly complex and rapidly changing system with both physical and mental components that would need to be perfectly accounted for to be able to fully rely on a given metric. Yes, the more statistics and subsequent metrics which are derived from them, the better overall picture of reality you MIGHT get, but not always. Metrics are shaped by what? Confirmation Bias. They are an attempt to summarize observations and confirm assumptions, thereby reducing the need to gather more information and the overall intellectual analysis required to come up with a valid conclusion regarding outcomes which are more likely to be repeated in similar circumstances in the future.

    Long story short - I agree with Bball, and I love the Mckey Fan quote "Intuition over Integers". The human mind is a wonderful thing!
    Last edited by Brad8888; 11-05-2013 at 02:43 PM.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Brad8888 For This Useful Post:


  10. #31

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Mattie schoolin people on the game of basketball.... Hilarious.

  11. #32
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,679

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Because people need to watch the game. You're trying to measure something that potentially ignores the bigger picture. The stat is meaningless because watching the game will tell you what you need to know.... regardless of what that lone stat says.
    This stat (like every other stat) is compiled by people who watch the game. It doesn't ignore the bigger picture. It just explains a small part of picture (in this case, scoring efficiency). That's all there is to it. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Nuntius For This Useful Post:


  13. #33
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,512

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Stats quantify what the eye sees. Stats aren't misleading. They can be misrepresented and misinterrpreted, but they're not misleading.
    That's what I am saying....
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  14. #34
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,679

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Like I've said so many times, there are people that wrongly think that accounting for 3's in this particular stat renders the statistic useless.
    Yep, those people exist. The hilarious part is that the statistic that they seem to cling on to (FG%) is useless exactly because it does not account for 3s.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Nuntius For This Useful Post:


  16. #35
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,512

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This stat (like every other stat) is compiled by people who watch the game. It doesn't ignore the bigger picture. It just explains a small part of picture (in this case, scoring efficiency). That's all there is to it. Nothing more, nothing less.
    That's what I'm saying too.

    It's just a piece of information that you have to put in context. And I think the context it's been put in lately is all out of whack with reality.

    The rest of it is I think this stat is fairly worthless for a team you are following because just watching the flow of the game and simple stats will tell you what you need to know versus this stat.

    If you are curious about a player on a team you don't follow much and the simple stats don't seem to line up with the value people seem to be putting on the player (or you're curious about trade proposals, scouting opponents, etc), then sure... look at this stat. Watch some game tape with this stat in mind and get a new perspective on his value to his team or for your own team in a trade....

    But for your own team that you coach/follow/manage everyday, if you're paying attention to the games then I think the stat is worthless. More than worthless even.
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  17. #36
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,837

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad8888 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yes, in a vacuum where every parameter of the original post is true, JOB should have been a visionary who should have been able to win championships here due to our volume of 3pt attempts and poor shooting percentage. Stan Van Gundy evolved into a coach who shared this vision and had far better personnel for this strategy could not win the title with it, and were not nearly as successful in the playoffs as many thought they should be.

    There is one portion of game flow that cannot be emphasized enough. While it is true that defensive rebounds after missed shots do not lead to extra possessions for the teams on defense, it DOES have another impact which is even more difficult to measure. The missed 3 is more likely to be damaging due to the likelihood that opposing teams will gain possession of the ball more quickly and with a higher likelihood of getting out in transition for better quality looks at the other end due to the 3pt team's defense not being able to fully get back.

    It was no accident that JOB screamed himself horse with his nearly maniacal "Push it! Push It!" when the Pacers were on offense. He wanted the Pacers to be able to counter the pace and possession quality advantage that opposing teams gained from the Pacers missed 3's. In turn, this led to poor quality shots due to having less ball and player movement and player fatigue causing players to both lose lift on their shots and having less energy to both get back AND play effective D and get defensive boards. It likely also led to more fouling on defense due to fatigue and lack of correct defensive positioning more frequently.

    While not having the weakness of "confirmation bias" (tendency to pay attention to and remember that which supports our own beliefs whether those beliefs accurately reflect reality or not), statistics and the subsequent metrics that they feed are necessarily flawed due to the inability to both measure every single variable of a given situation, then determining whether each variable is dependent or independent in every single possible causal relationship system. Basketball, broken down to these terms, is an incredibly complex and rapidly changing system with both physical and mental components that would need to be perfectly accounted for to be able to fully rely on a given metric. Yes, the more statistics and subsequent metrics which are derived from them, the better overall picture of reality you MIGHT get, but not always. Metrics are shaped by what? Confirmation Bias. They are an attempt to summarize observations and confirm assumptions, thereby reducing the need to gather more information and the overall intellectual analysis required to come up with a valid conclusion regarding outcomes which are more likely to be repeated in similar circumstances in the future.

    Long story short - I agree with Bball, and I love the Mckey Fan quote "Intuition over Integers". The human mind is a wonderful thing!
    TS% says nothing about how a team plays on defense. Additionally, O'Brien and Van Gundy's offenses were completely different. And if you think the Pacers hired O'Brien to win a championship, you are wrong. They hired O'Brien because he has proven himself capable of making bad teams mediocre while his team plays an entertaining up and down game of basketball. Taking lots of 3's doesn't make you a bad team or a good team, it's where and when you take them that counts.

    Also, TS% is not a justification for more 3 pointers. High efficiency big men also score well. Tyson Chandler is fifth in the history of the NBA with a TS% of .615. Number 6 is Reggie Miller. Charles Barkley, Dwight Howard, and Amare also score well.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to aamcguy For This Useful Post:


  19. #37
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There may not be a more meaningless stat than this. Seriously. Just watch the game. That will tell you what you need to know. This stat will confirm what you are seeing after the fact. But it won't tell you crap to look at the stat and then make predictions from it.

    Wasted possessions are wasted possessions. It doesn't matter if you can massage some stats that try to sugar coat the wasted possession. It's still a wasted possession.

    It's IMHO an absolutely pointless stat. I can see why the stat might be kept just as a way to go back and confirm some points your judgment tells you about what had transpired in a game or series of games... But your eyes can tell you what is a good shot and what is a bad shot. And too many bad shots are bad for the offense.... good for the other team's offense. And bad shots can be bad for your own defense as well.

    Seriously... this might be the most worthless stat in basketball. I don't know why it's being trotted out to explain anything. The game is much bigger and more evolved than this stat could possibly show or impact. Really, all this stat does is tell you that there's more to the game than stats in the first place.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  21. #38
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,512

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Do you guys really need 'advanced' stats like this one to help you understand and enjoy the team you follow play basketball?
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  22. #39
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,679

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    That's what I'm saying too.

    It's just a piece of information that you have to put in context. And I think the context it's been put in lately is all out of whack with reality.

    The rest of it is I think this stat is fairly worthless for a team you are following because just watching the flow of the game and simple stats will tell you what you need to know versus this stat.

    If you are curious about a player on a team you don't follow much and the simple stats don't seem to line up with the value people seem to be putting on the player (or you're curious about trade proposals, scouting opponents, etc), then sure... look at this stat. Watch some game tape with this stat in mind and get a new perspective on his value to his team or for your own team in a trade....

    But for your own team that you coach/follow/manage everyday, if you're paying attention to the games then I think the stat is worthless. More than worthless even.
    You don't need to put a statistic in context. You don't necessarily have to interpret a statistic.

    Some statistics are pretty straight-forward. Take FT% for example. What does it measure? How often a player hits his FTs. That's it. There is nothing more to take from it.

    TS% is more complex than FT% since it contains more variables but it can still be taken in face value.

    I disagree that your eyes are the absolute judge. You need both. When you value a team you become emotionally invested in some players. Statistics are needed in order to keep your opinion honest.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nuntius For This Useful Post:


  24. #40
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Criticizing TS% by assuming the team is taking bad shots or doesn't play good transition defense is just illogical. There is no justification for those assumptions, other than you remember the Jim O'Brien era and assume that's what every team is like when they shoot 3's.

    The smart teams take most of their 3's when the team is in position to get back on defense, for example. Dumb / bad teams, not so much. High volumes of threes does not inherently mean poor shot selection. Smart teams plan to take most of their thees within the flow of an offense and space their players to be in position to protect the basket and stay ahead of the fast break. If, however, they just dribbled over the half court line and started shooting pull up three's all day with no one in good position, that would be terrible for their defense.

  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  26. #41
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,679

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Do you guys really need 'advanced' stats like this one to help you understand and enjoy the team you follow play basketball?
    No one needs any kind of statistic in order to enjoy the team that he follows. That's not what this thread is about.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

  27. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Nuntius For This Useful Post:


  28. #42
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,756

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    I'm just wondering when was the stat ever used out of context, or which one has been used out of whack with reality.

    I agree it can be done, but it just reads like an pre-criticism of something that might or might not happen.
    ďJust because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.Ē ― Ricky Gervais.

    What if someone from a school of business or management school were to ask, How did you do this? How did you get the Pacers turned around? Is there a general approach you've taken that can be summarized?

    Larry Bird: Yeah, patience.

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  30. #43
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,837

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    If you don't want to or can't understand something, call it pointless and ridicule anybody who appreciates it.

    Likewise, if you can't understand why people are breaking out in nasty boils, call it witchcraft and burn the accused until the disease is gone.

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to aamcguy For This Useful Post:


  32. #44
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,512

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    When the explanation of it is flawed at the onset then 'push back' is what occurs....

    If any coach or manager needs this stat for his own team... something is dreadfully wrong. IMHO...
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  33. #45
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,512

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by aamcguy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If you don't want to or can't understand something, call it pointless and ridicule anybody who appreciates it.

    Likewise, if you can't understand why people are breaking out in nasty boils, call it witchcraft and burn the accused until the disease is gone.

    I understand it fine. That's why I am able to see it's value... and lack of value... in context.
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  34. #46
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,756

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If any coach or manager needs this stat for his own team... something is dreadfully wrong. IMHO...
    I'm sure a coach, like Brad Stevens, that relies heavily on advance stats agrees with you. The guy hired a grad student who didn't know anything about basketball to crunch numbers for him, and then took him to Boston. This is a rather tame stat, by comparison of all the other advance stats that professionals rely on.
    ďJust because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.Ē ― Ricky Gervais.

    What if someone from a school of business or management school were to ask, How did you do this? How did you get the Pacers turned around? Is there a general approach you've taken that can be summarized?

    Larry Bird: Yeah, patience.

  35. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  36. #47
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Somehow a stat that combines how well a player shoots 2's, 3's, FT's, and how often they get to the line has no value. Amazing.

    I guess we should ignore the statistic known as rebounds because as we all know, you don't need to know how well your team rebounded to see who won the game.....

  37. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  38. #48
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,837

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    When the explanation of it is flawed at the onset then 'push back' is what occurs....

    If any coach or manager needs this stat for his own team... something is dreadfully wrong. IMHO...
    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/vogel...wing-trend-nba

    It might not be a movement, but it's certainly a trend, one that coincides with the growing use of analytics. Most teams today, including the Pacers, have full-time staff members who pore over intricate details of players and lineups to discover strengths, weaknesses and trends. They analyze players to decipher their value beyond the obvious statistical contributions. They research which lineup combinations within a team are most productive. They know who plays well against which opponents, and otherwise.


    I'm sure you're right though. I would guess they specifically look at all kinds of advanced stats but TS%. Teams would be wasting their time trying to account for the fact that a shot 24 feet from the basket is worth more than a shot 18 feet from the basket.

  39. The Following User Says Thank You to aamcguy For This Useful Post:


  40. #49
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm sure a coach, like Brad Stevens, that relies heavily on advance stats agrees with you. The guy hired a grad student who didn't know anything about basketball to crunch numbers for him, and then took him to Boston. This is a rather tame stat, by comparison of all the other advance stats that professionals rely on.
    Why doesn't Brad Stevens just watch the games???

  41. The Following User Says Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  42. #50
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: True Shooting % Explained: Which is more important? A higher FG% or a higher TS%?

    I mean... is it that the TS% 'deniers' think we somehow OVER value this statistic? Is that the real rub? I'm baffled by this.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •