Bricklayer said:
As an aside, true shooting percentage is a decent semi-abstract stat. It was also the stat in which Peja was a superstar. Likely Steve Kerr too. Meanwhile a guy like Duncan or Shaq in his prime who does not shoot threes and is shaky at the line suffers.
It says what it says and you'd rather be high than low. But anytime you start getting made up stats that don't track well with the league's best players or even the biggest minute guys you have to put a "?" over the relevance of the stat. Its basically just a fancy way of saying "good shooter".
I don't see what is the problem here. The stat was "made up" to replace FG%. It does not imply in
any way, that the leaders are the top players in the league. All it does, like you say, implies who are the more effective shooters around (not even "best". If you want "best" you would probably have to add side conditions, but I won't get into that). Please look at this stat in the light of FG%. FG% is an outdated stat, and eFG% and TS% are much more effective.
A perhaps better way to view this stat, is to determine which players make the best of their offensive opportunities as far their offensive roles go (with regards to team and strategy).
1kingzfan said:
Although I haven't figured out the derivation of the formula (eg, why two free throws equal 88% of a FG attempt), it's basically a different way to measure the same thing that "points per shot" measures.
It is a different way, and a better one at that. You're misinterpreting the .44 coefficient.
The stats "revolution" you're currently seeing is based on modelling on possession. Teams are ranked by offensive capabilities, or defensive capabilities, per possession.
The .44 coefficient comes from the assumption that around 44% of all the free throws take up possessions (You'll have to accept this without proof, but let's just say non-Statistical-lightweights such as Dan Rosenbaum have agreed to this). Intuitively, this is correct.
There are four types of free throws:
1. Player is fouled, gets two FTA;
2. Player is fouled, gets three FTA;
3. Players makes the shot and gets a freebie;
4. Player gets technical FT, one FTA.
With (1) and (2), only the last FT ends the possession. (3) ends the possession, but is not as prevalent. (4) does not end the possession, and is not as prevalent either. Basically; less than half of the free throws attempted end a possession.
TS% measures points per shooting possession of a player. The number of shooting possessions is the (FGA+0.44*FTA) divisor (the multiplication with 2 is of course used for the fact that 2 points are given for a standard FG).
See
this and
this for more info.
I don't have ESPN insider, so I couldn't see the whole TSP list, but ...
See
Knickerblogger for a different source, updated daily. Numbers may differ on some slight points, I'm not sure yet why that is the case.
Instead of pooh-poohing the meaning of Kevin's presence at the very top of each of these stats and calling for question marks on their relevance (how relevant is ANY stat anyway, except the one that keeps track of how many rings you have?), we should be saying (or in some cases now suddenly just realizing) how INCREDIBLY productive Kevin has been as as starter for us since December. Kevin is at the top of these stats ratings amongst all NBA players even with his crappy beginning to the season.
Yes. The stat shows that Kevin Martin's been very productive lately. It may be obvious for most, if not all, Kingsfans, but having such a stat will at least draw some attention for the more casual NBA fan.
BigWaxer said:
Why do people defend Kevin like he is some all-star/god impact player?
Give him his props for a job well done, but he is by no means the best player in the league and according these stats he is, which IMO is just ridiculous. Stats can be manipulated to prove anyone’s point and if you want I will dig some up to prove the opposite.
You are contradicting yourself.
Stats will always its detractors. But consider this -- the stat creators do not claim the stats would be an "end it all" kind of thing. They devised a way which is more effective in attaining their goal than what their predecessors were able to. The problem is, like you say, that people are unsure of what that goal really is.
To me, these type "lists" are far from definitive either. But, they're getting better as the years go on. They should be able to pinpoint some cases which are not as clear to everyone, e.g. Michael Redd's and Zach Randolph's great PER/40 rating before they were widely recognised. And there lies the real value of these stats.
I knew he was a good shooter coming out of college, but I di not realize how good he can be
until these last few games. I think the mid range shot is the one shot all players need to learn, and if Cisco learns this shot it will help him also.
