Wingstop are top 5 among active players in postseason TS%

[sananspursfan21]

DON'T F---ING DRAG WINGSTOP INTO THIS

[SpursFan86]

I can't take a metric that doesn't factor in FG and FT misses seriously. It's a stupid metric when you see a guy like George Hill ranked ahead of Lebron James or my personal favorite of seeing Richard Jefferson ranked ahead of Duncan.

It does factor in FG/FT misses, just not directly (meaning, FG missed and FT missed aren't variables in the equation). If you continue missing shots, your FGA/FTA go up, but the amount of points you score remains the same. Thus, your TS% decreases. You act like missed FGs or FTs don't affect one's TS%, and that's just flat out wrong.

As for Hill being "ranked" ahead of LeBron or Jefferson being ranked ahead of Duncan - you could find the same sort of oddity with pretty much any stat out there.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/..._active_p.html

Perkins is ahead of Duncan. Shaun Livingston and Haslem are ahead of LeBron.

[Hoops Czar]

I bet you just figured out we won against Memphis..

I can't believe people are counting the Grizzlies as a series win. Quite possibly the worst playoff team in the history of the NBA.

[Dex]

Are you really pulling out highlights of Orlando Dwight from 2011 to reflect his impact in 2016?

Even I think Howard gets more flack than he should as a player, but that's just downright silly. He's a s of who he used to be.

[Chinook]

Are you really pulling out highlights of Orlando Dwight from 2011 to reflect his impact in 2016?

Even I think Howard gets more flack than he should as a player, but that's just downright silly. He's a s of who he used to be.

I don't think that's a fair criticism. The OP is talking about career playoff TS%, so Dwight being bad now doesn't mean much. He was dominant in his day, that's why he is so high on the list.

[kobyz]

I bet you just figured out we won against Memphis..

No, just not a homer and not overrating players like a player fan...

[Kawhitstorm]

Are you really pulling out highlights of Orlando Dwight from 2011 to reflect his impact in 2016?

Even I think Howard gets more flack than he should as a player, but that's just downright silly. He's a s of who he used to be.

I guess since Shaq was a s of himself after he was past his prime his CAREER TS% is just a fluke.

[look_at_g_shred]

Is it october yet?

[GSH]

You can't gauge a player's value by looking at TS% in a vacuum. Here's one easy example why:

Dwight Howard gets intentionally fouled 5 times, and he only makes 50% of his FT's. (5-10)
His TS% for that stretch is .568.


Notice who is #2 on the list.

[GSH]

Here's another easy example:

LMA makes 7-10 FG's in a game. He scores 14 points on 10 attempts, and his TS% for that game is .700.

Next game LMA makes 7-10 FG's, but gets 4 And-1 opportunities from fouls. He makes two of the bonus FT's (2-4). This time he scores 16 points on 10 attempts, but his TS% is only .680.

If the refs hadn't blown the four whistles, and LMA hadn't made the extra 2 points, his TS% would have been higher. But the team would have been 2 points worse off, on the same number of shots and possessions.

[itzsoweezee]

LeBron was a horrible shooter last year outside the paint. Not sure what point you're trying to prove. TS isn't a stat meant to evaluate the overall ability of a player.

[dabom]

Here's another easy example:

LMA makes 7-10 FG's in a game. He scores 14 points on 10 attempts, and his TS% for that game is .700.

Next game LMA makes 7-10 FG's, but gets 4 And-1 opportunities from fouls. He makes two of the bonus FT's (2-4). This time he scores 16 points on 10 attempts, but his TS% is only .680.

If the refs hadn't blown the four whistles, and LMA hadn't made the extra 2 points, his TS% would have been higher. But the team would have been 2 points worse off, on the same number of shots and possessions.

That is true. I guess it is true to its name. We should be looking more at Points per possession instead. I see that used but not for single games. I would like that actually. They should add PPP stat to the box score.

[itzsoweezee]

Here's another easy example:

LMA makes 7-10 FG's in a game. He scores 14 points on 10 attempts, and his TS% for that game is .700.

Next game LMA makes 7-10 FG's, but gets 4 And-1 opportunities from fouls. He makes two of the bonus FT's (2-4). This time he scores 16 points on 10 attempts, but his TS% is only .680.

If the refs hadn't blown the four whistles, and LMA hadn't made the extra 2 points, his TS% would have been higher. But the team would have been 2 points worse off, on the same number of shots and possessions.

Obviously, points per possession is a better indicator of offensive productivity. But TS is not trying to measure that.

[itzsoweezee]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/..._active_p.html

Rank	Player	TS%
1.	Kawhi Leonard	.6023
2.	Dwight Howard	.5965
3.	Stephen Curry	.5950
4.	Danny Green	.5948
5.	James Harden	.5914
6.	Chris Paul	.5837
7.	Manu Ginobili	.5805

54.

Tony Parker

.5140

The Spurs have two amazing defenders that also happen to be amazing shooters. That is almost unheard of. Why would any team break that up just to compensate for the ty play of their point guard?

[Chinook]

You can't gauge a player's value by looking at TS% in a vacuum. Here's one easy example why:

Dwight Howard gets intentionally fouled 5 times, and he only makes 50% of his FT's. (5-10)
His TS% for that stretch is .568.

Notice who is #2 on the list.

This is a legitimate example, but most of the harm goes away as sample sizes increase. The point behind the .44 coefficient is the percentage of FTs taken as the result of And-1s and Ts as opposed to ones from shooting fouls or bonus fouls. While that leaves room for quirks like the ones you pointed out, it allows one to estimate the TS% for every player in the league by just adding the formula into and Excel sheet of all the stat lines. If you were to actually have to look to see whether the FT was part of a used possession, the stat would be significantly harder to calculate (to the point that it wouldn't be used at all honestly).

It's not perfect, but it should give a near-perfect fit when taken in large samples.

Here's another easy example:

LMA makes 7-10 FG's in a game. He scores 14 points on 10 attempts, and his TS% for that game is .700.

Next game LMA makes 7-10 FG's, but gets 4 And-1 opportunities from fouls. He makes two of the bonus FT's (2-4). This time he scores 16 points on 10 attempts, but his TS% is only .680.

If the refs hadn't blown the four whistles, and LMA hadn't made the extra 2 points, his TS% would have been higher. But the team would have been 2 points worse off, on the same number of shots and possessions.

This isn't all that great of an example. I mean, he missed more scoring opportunities. Of course his percentage should be lower. Again, though, that would be sorted out with a bigger sample size.

[Arcadian]

I'm trying to understand the formula for TS%. Where did the .44 come from? Is that based on something empirical?

[dabom]

I'm trying to understand the formula for TS%. Where did the .44 come from? Is that based on something empirical?

Average off and1's, technicals on the year and probably multiple years.

[Chinook]

I'm trying to understand the formula for TS%. Where did the .44 come from? Is that based on something empirical?

It's essentially accounting for how many free throws do not use possessions. For and-1s and Ts, the coefficient would be 0, and for other free throws, it would be .5. But in order to know which ones to use, you'd have to look at more than the box score. So by taking the weighted average, you can get a good estimate. It doesn't work well for a single game, but it should be nearly perfect for the whole league over the course of a season.

[SAGirl]

Is it october yet?

seriously.. right?
between Tony vs. Manu threads, Timmy threads, statistical interesting tidbits that tell us nothing new...
/sigh

I am actually contemplating how interesting next season could be when we are going to start seeing so many new young players. I could chat about that for days.

[Kawhitstorm]

LeBron was a horrible shooter last year outside the paint. Not sure what point you're trying to prove. TS isn't a stat meant to evaluate the overall ability of a player.

Who cares how he scores as long as he's scoring at an efficient rate?

LeBron had a TS% of 58% in the postseason b/c he was jacking up sorry ass jumpers like Porker.

[Kawhitstorm]

Obviously, points per possession is a better indicator of offensive productivity. But TS is not trying to measure that.

PPP leaders are usually guys who attempt less than 10 shots a game & live off lobs or spot up 3 point shooters. You aren't going to get those shots on a consistent basis thus it's just for specialist.

[look_at_g_shred]

seriously.. right?
between Tony vs. Manu threads, Timmy threads, statistical interesting tidbits that tell us nothing new...
/sigh

I am actually contemplating how interesting next season could be when we are going to start seeing so many new young players. I could chat about that for days.

Yea for sure! So much new blood! Should be fun

[tholdren]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/..._active_p.html

Rank	Player	TS%
1.	Kawhi Leonard	.6023
2.	Dwight Howard	.5965
3.	Stephen Curry	.5950
4.	Danny Green	.5948
5.	James Harden	.5914
6.	Chris Paul	.5837
7.	Manu Ginobili	.5805

54.

Tony Parker

.5140

Wow, what a ty stat.

[GSH]

This is a legitimate example, but most of the harm goes away as sample sizes increase. The point behind the .44 coefficient is the percentage of FTs taken as the result of And-1s and Ts as opposed to ones from shooting fouls or bonus fouls. While that leaves room for quirks like the ones you pointed out, it allows one to estimate the TS% for every player in the league by just adding the formula into and Excel sheet of all the stat lines. If you were to actually have to look to see whether the FT was part of a used possession, the stat would be significantly harder to calculate (to the point that it wouldn't be used at all honestly).

It's not perfect, but it should give a near-perfect fit when taken in large samples.



This isn't all that great of an example. I mean, he missed more scoring opportunities. Of course his percentage should be lower. Again, though, that would be sorted out with a bigger sample size.

You missed the point. I understand the calculation fine. What I said was that you can't look at it in a vacuum. Since the ultimate point of stats is always to compare one player to another, it's probably a good idea to understand the times when a stat doesn't do that very well... don't you think? If you look at Dwight Howard's TS%, and it's higher than Steph Curry's, does that mean Dwight is a better player, or would help a team more? I can't help but look at the "why", when I see something like that.

For the record, sample size isn't the cure-all you say it is. Position and playing style are a big factor, and they have an effect over the whole season, and whole careers. For his career, Howard has something like 11 FGA to 9 FTA per game. And a LOT of those FTA's are scoring opportunities without any FGA's associated. I just pulled a random year for Shaq. He had 336 two-shot FTA opportunities that year. That's the equivalent of 168 2P shots going up, without any FGA's to go with them. He made a ty 47% of his FT's, but that gave him a .534 TS% for those 168 scoring opportunities. That's a big enough sample, isn't it?

Since you've established yourself as the bull-goose authority on everything, you should also understand that TS% rewards the out of high-variance 3P shooters. A guy who makes 2-10 3-pointers one game, and 6-10 3-pointers the next game, has a scorching .600 TS%. But there's a good chance that his shooting lost his team just as many games as it won. That's not an aberration of sample size. It's something that happens over and over again through a season, and the effect gets magnified in the playoffs when more games are grind-it-out contests in the last few minutes. 3P shots score a lot of points, but they also result in more dry possessions, and more points being scored on the other end. But that doesn't show up at all in TS%, does it? That's always been my knock on Manu - he plays high variance ball even in close, close games.

The point is, TS% tells you something at times, just like any other stat. But the inferences the OP was making? Not so much.

[Kawhitstorm]

The point is, TS% tells you something at times, just like any other stat. But the inferences the OP was making? Not so much.

You narrative is moot when it comes to Danny/Kawhi since they rarely get to the line or just chuck up shots.