Page 8 of 18 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 437

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

  1. #176
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,038

    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
    IOW, I refuse to argue with you when ultimately we'd be on the same side in this thread.
    The problem is that people from both "sides" have thanked Eindar's post which indicates that there is a lot of common ground between the two sides. Both "sides" seem to think that we should use both stats and "eyeball" but they also seem to think that the other "side" is arguing for one over the other.
    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

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


  3. #177
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,098

    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
    Well, this thread isn't even allegedly about Granger....
    Right, it's about the stat. The stat that was misused by those thinking the stat represented how good of a player is overall. The point of the thread was to point out that the stat is limited in what it measured, and should only be used in that manner. Here we are 6pages later, arguing whether or not it should be used all the time with nothing else, when that's NEVER been said, by anyone.
    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 2 Users Say Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  5. #178
    .
    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
    No, it was brought up to show that he was an efficient scorer, and Sollozzo made the sarcastic comment about Danny being better than MJ, and it went from there. Only one side is thinking that TS% represents how good of an overally player is, and it's not the side arguing in favor of advanced stats. It was about efficiency in scoring, and only that.
    This whole thing is a good example of why I'm no longer a believer in the concept that every time a disagreement causes people to take sides, that each side's opinion or stance is equally valid. Each side does have equal rights to speak their opinion, but that does not for one second mean that both sides are equally right/wrong 'in their own way.'

    I've seen this happen so many times in the last decade of my life (I'm 29 now), in politics, philosophy, religion, and sports, that I just eventually realized that's a bunch of nonsense. It CAN be true sometimes, in a given disagreement, they do exist, but by no means is that how it always works.

    Reason was met with ignorance in this case.

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  7. #179
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,520

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

    By the way everyone, this is the non-dick version of what I was trying to say earlier.

    Not to say I'm not a dick. I am. Anywho.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This whole thing is a good example of why I'm no longer a believer in the concept that every time a disagreement causes people to take sides, that each side's opinion or stance is equally valid. Each side does have equal rights to speak their opinion, but that does not for one second mean that both sides are equally right/wrong 'in their own way.'

    I've seen this happen so many times in the last decade of my life (I'm 29 now), in politics, philosophy, religion, and sports, that I just eventually realized that's a bunch of nonsense. It CAN be true sometimes, in a given disagreement, they do exist, but by no means is that how it always works.

    Reason was met with ignorance in this case.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  8. #180
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    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
    No. No one is arguing for stats above common sense. The problem is that some of you completely dismiss stats because they disagree with your "eyeballs" or something.

    Eindar is absolutely right. We should use both. I always use both. But it is just so annoying when people completely dismiss a stat simply because it doesn't agree with their bias in disliking a certain player.
    Maybe this is the disconnect instead...
    The problem is that some of you completely dismiss stats because they disagree with your "eyeballs" or something.
    We should use both. I always use both. But it is just so annoying when people completely dismiss a stat simply because it doesn't agree with their bias in disliking a certain player
    Could it be that perhaps some of us have analyzed both and came to a different conclusion? Maybe we're not dismissing anything per se', just have arrived at a different opinion... No player 'hate' necessary.

    I know I can't use Troy Murphy as an example because that is a strawman argument (or so I've been told), but now that it's been pointed out his TS was pretty good doesn't that cast a different light on the other thread where Granger's good TS didn't just win many converts to his side in the "Start Danny or Start Lance Sweepstakes"?

    Could it be that TS just didn't hold the weight to sway anyone and that what it analyzes was already in those opinions anyway? It sure was for me...
    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

  9. #181
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    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
    Everyone else on the advanced stats side is agreeing with me too. That's my point here. You're making a strawman army to fight, because what you think people are saying, isn't what they're saying.

    AND I think that is true of BOTH sides overall...
    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

  10. #182
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This whole thing is a good example of why I'm no longer a believer in the concept that every time a disagreement causes people to take sides, that each side's opinion or stance is equally valid. Each side does have equal rights to speak their opinion, but that does not for one second mean that both sides are equally right/wrong 'in their own way.'

    I've seen this happen so many times in the last decade of my life (I'm 29 now), in politics, philosophy, religion, and sports, that I just eventually realized that's a bunch of nonsense. It CAN be true sometimes, in a given disagreement, they do exist, but by no means is that how it always works.

    Reason was met with ignorance in this case.
    And then there's always the problem of thinking it's the other side that is ignorant....
    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

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Bball For This Useful Post:


  12. #183
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,520

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

    It's funny you say that because I literally said the opposite of what you're suggesting. (In other words, you're full of ****).

    I asked BnG why he had to suggest Granger was just an inefficient chucker, when not only is this not true any sense, but that you could argue Lance should start WITHOUT degrading Granger's abilities.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    I know I can't use Troy Murphy as an example because that is a strawman argument (or so I've been told), but now that it's been pointed out his TS was pretty good doesn't that cast a different light on the other thread where Granger's good TS didn't just win many converts to his side in the "Start Danny or Start Lance Sweepstakes"?

    Could it be that TS just didn't hold the weight to sway anyone and that what it analyzes was already in those opinions anyway? It sure was for me...
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to mattie For This Useful Post:


  14. #184
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,520

    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
    And then there's always the problem of thinking it's the other side that is ignorant....
    You argued earlier that this stat, based on basic algebra, tells us nothing. You ARE ignorant. =)
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  15. #185
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,775

    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 Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    We had 3 different threads on Copeland, I think. Two of them went 20+ pages
    Yes, but does any single poster get to take the credit for their comment setting off a firestorm? I'll wear this badge of honor proudly.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  17. #186
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,520

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

    By the way, I should mention this- I've never been of the opinion that I'm a know it all when it comes to basketball. In fact the opposite. I'm aware of my massive shortcomings which is exactly why I rely on statistics to help inform my beliefs. My beliefs remain flexible because I'm aware of my own lack of knowledge. It takes an open mind to educate yourself in the first place.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mattie For This Useful Post:


  19. #187
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    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
    Here is the post that started it all:



    As you can see, mattie never mentions the word better. He also mentions the word more efficient which is exactly what TS% measures.

    And here is the post that misused the stat for the first time:



    So, as you can see it was Sollozzo who started misusing and misinterpreting the stat. Absolutely no one of the "stat guys" has claimed that a higher TS% equals better player.
    The stat shows player efficiency. I think we can all agree to that.

    The stat was used to bolster the argument that Granger should start over Lance when he returns. Can we not agree to that? Everything goes off the rails from that point forward.

    True, it was used to counter the "Danny is a chucker" side of the argument. But it didn't have the impact imagined and people dug in their heels. But as with any stat, there's a lot more to the game to be considered.

    One stat wasn't going to settle anything this nuanced.
    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

  20. #188
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,775

    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 Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Where is Naptown Seth when you need him?
    I've been wondering where he is. We're 4-0, but neither him or Peck are posting. It just doesn't feel right.

  21. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  22. #189
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,520

    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
    The stat shows player efficiency. I think we can all agree to that.
    Well. Now we can, thank you for changing your position. I apologize for being a dick earlier, but it was hard when you said, "this stat is stupid." It's not.

    The stat was used to bolster the argument that Granger should start over Lance when he returns. Can we not agree to that? Everything goes off the rails from that point forward.
    No we can't agree. It wasn't used for that. In fact people were saying, "fine if you think Lance should start, I actually agree with you, stop making **** up about Granger that isn't true."
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

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


  24. #190
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,098

    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
    True, it was used to counter the "Danny is a chucker" side of the argument. But it didn't have the impact imagined and people dug in their heels. But as with any stat, there's a lot more to the game to be considered.
    It didn't have the impact imagined, because it resulted in people trying to dismiss the stat, because they'd rather run with the biasness in their eyes and argue that the stat is wrong.
    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.

  25. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  26. #191
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    8,053

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I've been wondering where he is. We're 4-0, but neither him or Peck are posting. It just doesn't feel right.
    I was wondering that too last night.

  27. #192
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    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
    You argued earlier that this stat, based on basic algebra, tells us nothing. You ARE ignorant. =)
    It tells us nothing that we can't glean from focusing on one team and factoring in simple stats. You don't need algebra to know who takes good shots, who makes shots, who knows how to get to the line, and who hits their FT's. You can take the individual pieces and put it all together in your head without a calculator. And when you do it that way you can also pinpoint the areas a player needs to work on.

    It's a little different when looking at the opposition and trying to break down their games. A team and players that you likely don't follow nearly as closely as your own team. At that point the numbers behind the numbers get more important.
    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

  28. #193
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,775

    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 Eleazar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I was wondering that too last night.

    I'm thinking that a win over Chicago to put us at 5-0 would be the perfect occasion for the first "Odd Thoughts" of the year (hint hint).

  29. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  30. #194
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,098

    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 asked McKey in another thread, I think or it might have been this one, why he's attacking the stat if he thinks it's used wrong. That quesiton applies to everyone else. If the problem is saying that we rely on the stat too much, or that we're using the stat wrongly, then why in the hell are we arguing over the stat, instead of pointing out specific times when it's used wrongly or too much emphasis on it?

    I've got a feeling that there aren't any specific examples, that's why.
    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.

  31. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  32. #195
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,038

    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
    Maybe this is the disconnect instead...
    This disconnect exist because you have said numerous times that the stats are useless. On the other hand, no one from the "other side" said that the human eye is useless.

    So, we can clearly see that the one "side" has partially rejected the "other side" while the "other side" has made a conscious effort on taking both into account.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Could it be that perhaps some of us have analyzed both and came to a different conclusion? Maybe we're not dismissing anything per se', just have arrived at a different opinion... No player 'hate' necessary.
    It's possible but it doesn't seem to be the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I know I can't use Troy Murphy as an example because that is a strawman argument (or so I've been told), but now that it's been pointed out his TS was pretty good doesn't that cast a different light on the other thread where Granger's good TS didn't just win many converts to his side in the "Start Danny or Start Lance Sweepstakes"?

    Could it be that TS just didn't hold the weight to sway anyone and that what it analyzes was already in those opinions anyway? It sure was for me...
    TS% is simply an measure of scoring efficiency. It isn't supposed to indicate which player is better therefore it shouldn't sway anyone's opinion on that matter.

    Mattie pointed out at Granger's TS% because several people called Granger "an inefficient chucker" throughout the original thread. That's why TS% was used. It was used in order to argue that Granger was not inefficient like some people think. Because that's exactly what TS% measures. It measures scoring efficiency and it was used to defend a player's scoring efficiency as it should have been used.

    And people just reject it because they have a personal bias against said player.
    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

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


  34. #196
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    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
    It didn't have the impact imagined, because it resulted in people trying to dismiss the stat, because they'd rather run with the biasness in their eyes and argue that the stat is wrong.
    If you break plays and take bad shots left and right, and hit them, you'll have a high TS... correct? So IOW there's more to look at than just this lone stat even if it's being used to refute the "Danny is a chucker" line. (Not saying Danny does or doesn't do that only that we'd need to look at a lot more info and that the TS is simply not the end of the story).
    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

  35. #197
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,520

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

    Believe it or not, for the first time, I think we're actually getting somewhere. Maybe.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  36. #198
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,098

    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 you break plays and take bad shots left and right, and hit them, you'll have a high TS... correct? So IOW there's more to look at than just this lone stat even if it's being used to refute the "Danny is a chucker" line. (Not saying Danny does or doesn't do that only that we'd need to look at a lot more info and that the TS is simply not the end of the story).
    How are they bad shots, if they're going in?

    The term chucker represents someone who is an inefficient shooter, who shoots a lot. So someone who has a high TS%, isn't a chucker.
    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.

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


  38. #199
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    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 disconnect exist because you have said numerous times that the stats are useless. On the other hand, no one from the "other side" said that the human eye is useless.

    So, we can clearly see that the one "side" has partially rejected the "other side" while the "other side" has made a conscious effort on taking both into account.



    It's possible but it doesn't seem to be the case.



    TS% is simply an measure of scoring efficiency. It isn't supposed to indicate which player is better therefore it shouldn't sway anyone's opinion on that matter.

    Mattie pointed out at Granger's TS% because several people called Granger "an inefficient chucker" throughout the original thread. That's why TS% was used. It was used in order to argue that Granger was not inefficient like some people think. Because that's exactly what TS% measures. It measures scoring efficiency and it was used to defend a player's scoring efficiency as it should have been used.

    And people just reject it because they have a personal bias against said player.
    This disconnect exist because you have said numerous times that the stats are useless.
    I never said stats were useless. That would be an incorrect blanket statement and characterization.

    I think the argument was Danny had become a chucker... not necessarily that he was 'inefficient'. More that his game had become rather 1 dimensional on offense... it was probably implied of course that he wasn't necessarily dead eye from there but there's more to it than that... Including the idea that maybe overall the team would be better served with less 3 attempts, especially quick 3's.

    Reggie was constantly running off screens for his 3's as part of the offense. We didn't really use Granger in this way. (Just in case someone wanted to talk about Reggie's 3's).
    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

  39. #200
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,520

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

    Oh?

    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. .
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

Posting Permissions

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