Please, Help me with my math

[Martin R]

15 shots x 2 points per shot = 30 points
15 shots x 3 points per shot = 45 points

Manu got 46 points on 15 shots last night. So Manu mathematically make his shots to perform like they were all 3 pointer + "an one" for one of them.

amazing.

[ancestron]

He made 8 threes last night.

[travis2]

He went 8-9 on free throws. Not all of them were "and 1" situations.

[travis2]

so...

8 x 3 = 24
7 x 2 = 14 (15 total - 8 3pt = 7 2pt)
8 x 1 = 8

Total = 46

[MI21]

He isn't trying to say that his 3's were "and 1's" he is just trying to say that it is the equivalent of each basket being a 3 and one of them being an "and 1".

Confusing to explain, but I know what he is getting at :lol

[WalterBenitez]

so...

8 x 3 = 24
7 x 2 = 14 (15 total - 8 3pt = 7 2pt)
8 x 1 = 8

Total = 46

Are you free next wednesday, need some help with math @ school

[SAGambler]

Or better yet just divide the 46 pts by the 20 shots he took and he averaged 2.3 per stroke.

Pretty damn impressive.

[Slohoop]

1+1=2 :lol

[Spurminator]

46 points on 15 shots is unreal efficiency.

[Officer Slater]

15^2*3=Spork

[Manudona]

21 + 20 + 9 = 5

[Spurminator]

46 points on 15 shots is unreal efficiency.


I've just looked through the top 100 single game scoring performances of the past 20 years and none of them were as efficient as Manu's 3.07 points per shot. The only one that even came close was Willie Burton's 53 points on 19 shots in 1994 (2.79)... he hit 24 FTs that game.

It would have been more compelling if Manu had gotten 50+, I suppose, but it's still noteworthy. Rarely does anyone score this many points at even 2+ PPS, let alone 3+.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_game.html

[T Park]

Well if the stiff would've hit a couple more 2 point shots.

I mean my god

:lmao

[FromWayDowntown]

15^2*3=Spork

Actually, I think that equation goes 4*4*4=Spork.

4 wins * 4 rounds * 4 times.

(actually, that's not entirely correct because its (4*4*3)+((3*1)+(4*3))=Spork, but it's close enough)

[T Park]

Spuns equation?

65 62 61 = 0

[FromWayDowntown]

I've just looked through the top 100 single game scoring performances of the past 20 years and none of them were as efficient as Manu's 3.07 points per shot. The only one that even came close was Willie Burton's 53 points on 19 shots in 1994 (2.79)... he hit 24 FTs that game.

It would have been more compelling if Manu had gotten 50+, I suppose, but it's still noteworthy. Rarely does anyone score this many points at even 2+ PPS, let alone 3+.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_game.html

That's amazing. 3.07 pps is unreal.

[Spurminator]

I'm a moron... Manu took 20 FGA, not 15, I misread the original post and neglected to look at the box score.

PPS was 2.3. That's still great, but not newsworthy... and certainly not worth checking 100 box scores.

:pctoss :depressed

[T Park]

:lol

NBA TV's player of the night though was Carlos Boozer.

Sigh, gotta stop giving a crap about stuff like that.

[Martin R]

I've just looked through the top 100 single game scoring performances of the past 20 years and none of them were as efficient as Manu's 3.07 points per shot. The only one that even came close was Willie Burton's 53 points on 19 shots in 1994 (2.79)... he hit 24 FTs that game.

It would have been more compelling if Manu had gotten 50+, I suppose, but it's still noteworthy. Rarely does anyone score this many points at even 2+ PPS, let alone 3+.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_game.html

there you go.
It was meant to be an ironic post.
;)

+3.07 per shot is flat out unreal. Part of comics books or cartoons.

M

[mikejones99]

20 attempted shots and only 15 made shots is 75% Oberto made eleven of eleven one game I believe last year. Boozer had triple double

[stretch]

Confusing to explain, but I know what he is getting at :lol

So do I.

What a waste of a thread. Quite possibly the most pointless thread ever.

[T Park]

Boozer had triple double

Good for him, lets see him score 46, make 8 threes, and single handidly beat two hot shooting wings in Lebron and Larry Hughes and the rest of the Cavaliers.

[Ariel]

I've just looked through the top 100 single game scoring performances of the past 20 years and none of them were as efficient as Manu's 3.07 points per shot. The only one that even came close was Willie Burton's 53 points on 19 shots in 1994 (2.79)... he hit 24 FTs that game.

It would have been more compelling if Manu had gotten 50+, I suppose, but it's still noteworthy. Rarely does anyone score this many points at even 2+ PPS, let alone 3+.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_game.html


I'm a moron... Manu took 20 FGA, not 15, I misread the original post and neglected to look at the box score.

PPS was 2.3. That's still great, but not newsworthy... and certainly not worth checking 100 box scores.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you don't have a clue what PPS is, and that you didn't factor FTs whatsoever, which explains your latter post. Typically FTs come as a result of an offensive possession, and thus you can't simply count the points that come as a result and disregard the former. Statistically it's considered that 1 FTA ~~ 0.44 shots (some come as a result of AND 1s, 3Ps, tech. fouls, etc.), so the formula used is PPS = Points / (FGA + 0.44 * FTA)

In fact, Manu's PPS yesterday was 1.92, not 2.3... and THAT IS STILL UNREAL. Go back and tell me how many games with such high individual scoring mark can rival its efficiency. i'm going to go on and assume not that many. For the record, in that game you mention, Willie Burton's PPS was 1.79... just so that you get the picture.

[T Park]

but boozer is only one man


As is Ginobili....

[T Park]

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you don't have a clue what PPS is, and that you didn't factor FTs whatsoever, which explains your latter post. In fact, Manu's PPS yesterday was 1.92, not 2.3... and THAT IS STILL UNREAL. Go back and tell me how many games with such high individual scoring mark can rival its efficiency. i'm going to go on and assume not that many. For the record, int that game you mention, Willie Burton's PPS was 1.79... just so that you get the picture.


FWD is probobly one of the smartest basketball writers I've ever seen so yes, Im sure he knows over you Ariel :rolleyes

[Ariel]

FWD is probobly one of the smartest basketball writers I've ever seen so yes, Im sure he knows over you Ariel :rolleyes
Then it shouldn't be that difficult for you to point out where my mistake lies. I'm waiting.

[Spurminator]

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you don't have a clue what PPS is, and that you didn't factor FTs whatsoever, which explains your latter post. In fact, Manu's PPS yesterday was 1.92, not 2.3... and THAT IS STILL UNREAL. Go back and tell me how many games with such high individual scoring mark can rival its efficiency. i'm going to go on and assume not that many. For the record, int that game you mention, Willie Burton's PPS was 1.79... just so that you get the picture.


I know exactly what PPS means. You do not factor FTA into PPS.

* PPS: Points Per Shot = PTS/FGA

46/20 = 2.3

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=nbafgpct&qual=true&sort=pps&league=nba&split=0&season=2008&seasontype=2&avg=none&pos=all

[Ariel]

I know exactly what PPS means. You do not factor FTA into PPS.

* PPS: Points Per Shot = PTS/FGA

46/20 = 2.3

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=nbafgpct&qual=true&sort=pps&league=nba&split=0&season=2008&seasontype=2&avg=none&pos=all
So if you score 20 pts all on FTs, with no FGA your PPS is infinite?

Brilliant.

[Spurminator]

Technically, yes. Same thing if you score 2 pts at the FT line with no shots attempted.

[T Park]

So if you score 20 pts all on FTs, with no FGA your PPS is infinite?

Brilliant.


:lol

Don't hate on the stat if it doesn't fit your hate filled agenda jerk.

[Ariel]

Technically, yes. Same thing if you score 2 pts at the FT line with no shots attempted.
And you can't see the flaw in that? :lol Look up the reasoning I added to my original post afterwards. And yes, ESPN's stupid formula notwithstanding, any serious PPS statistic can't disregard FTA. It's ludicrous, and goes to show hom much the ESPN folks know. Although there is no formal definition such statistic and therefore it's subject to debate, the more accurate definitions do take FTA into account at a 0.44 factor as I previously described.

[T Park]

So ESPN invented the stat?

Want to show me to the link where that happened?

[Ariel]

:lol

Don't hate on the stat if it doesn't fit your hate filled agenda jerk.
Dude, you're like a 5 year old clapping and cheering for a stance in an argument he doesn't get. Get lost.

[T Park]

Dude, you're like a 5 year old clapping and cheering for a stance in an argument he doesn't get. Get lost.

I'm waiting for the link that shows ESPN invented the stat.

[Spurminator]

It's not ESPN's stat, it's standard. If I'm calculating PPS I'm going to use the standard formula.

I never argued that PPS is some kind of bullet-proof statistic. I don't see why anyone would imply I think PPS is flawless.

[T Park]

It's not ESPN's stat, it's standard. If I'm calculating PPS I'm going to use the standard formula.


I know that. You know that.

Apparently this clown doesn't though.

[timvp]

Ariel comes off like a pompous azz in this thread. Not only that, he'd dead wrong. If someone says PPS (points per shot), you do exactly what Spurminator did and divide the number of points by the number of field goal attempts. If you want to factor in free throw attempts, that's considered either aPPS (adjusted points per shot) or part of TS%.

Apology Needed.

*resumes packing suitcase*

[E20]

Why not subtract the number of points recieved by FT's and then divide that number by the FGA? That is more logical.

[MrChug]

I've just looked through the top 100 single game scoring performances of the past 20 years and none of them were as efficient as Manu's 3.07 points per shot. The only one that even came close was Willie Burton's 53 points on 19 shots in 1994 (2.79)... he hit 24 FTs that game.

It would have been more compelling if Manu had gotten 50+, I suppose, but it's still noteworthy. Rarely does anyone score this many points at even 2+ PPS, let alone 3+.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_game.html

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS...I watched that game!!!! I was traveling with a g/f at the time and saw him just STROKE IT for the Heat (or was that my girlfriend?!?!? :devil ).

Isn't it funny that we signed him I think a few years later and he couldn't do SHIT for us??

[MrChug]

Oh, and Martin?

You need help with a WHOLE hell of alot more than that bud.

[E20]

I think it should be for every two FT attempts it should count as a shot attempt towards the PPS stat.

[E20]

Either you count FT's or you don't. So if you are going to factor in the points recieved by FT's you need a way to factor in the FT attempts and relate them to shot attempts. If you are not going to factor in FT's, subtract the points recieved from FT's from the total and use that new number to divide by the number of field goal attempts.

[hsxvvd]

http://blogs.chron.com/blog9/ogre01.jpg

I Hate NERDS!

[timvp]

Either you count FT's or you don't. So if you are going to factor in the points recieved by FT's you need a way to factor in the FT attempts and relate them to shot attempts. If you are not going to factor in FT's, subtract the points recieved from FT's from the total and use that new number to divide by the number of field goal attempts.That stat already exists. It's called adjusted field goal percentage. Just take that equation you talked about, divide it by two and turn it into a percentage.

Congrats on re-inventing the wheel :tu

[Martin R]

Oh, and Martin?

You need help with a WHOLE hell of alot more than that bud.

I'm all ears. Tell me...

[SAGambler]

I've just looked through the top 100 single game scoring performances of the past 20 years and none of them were as efficient as Manu's 3.07 points per shot. The only one that even came close was Willie Burton's 53 points on 19 shots in 1994 (2.79)... he hit 24 FTs that game.

It would have been more compelling if Manu had gotten 50+, I suppose, but it's still noteworthy. Rarely does anyone score this many points at even 2+ PPS, let alone 3+.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_game.html

Except Manu didn't take 15 shots......He took 20.....Which makes it 2.3 per

[Spurminator]

Except Manu didn't take 15 shots......He took 20.....Which makes it 2.3 per


Gee, thank you for catching that.... :lol

[Spurminator]

Ariel comes off like a pompous azz in this thread. Not only that, he'd dead wrong. If someone says PPS (points per shot), you do exactly what Spurminator did and divide the number of points by the number of field goal attempts. If you want to factor in free throw attempts, that's considered either aPPS (adjusted points per shot) or part of TS%.

Apology Needed.

*resumes packing suitcase*


It's like if I did a comparison on Manu's PPG and Ariel accused me of not knowing what PPG is because I didn't factor minutes into the equation... :wtf

[E20]

That stat already exists. It's called adjusted field goal percentage. Just take that equation you talked about, divide it by two and turn it into a percentage.

Congrats on re-inventing the wheel :tu
How can you blame me for not knowing such a mundane stat?

So if the original PPS stat counts FT points, then it is a weighted stat and has no real value until you factor in FT's. This discussion blows.

[MrChug]

I'm all ears. Tell me...

That might be one indication...you're all ears. Que pobre.

Sorry Dumbo.

[LilMissSPURfect]

46 points on 15 shots is unreal efficiency.


one bad boy! MVP MVP