Would Bulls fans trade Derrick Rose for LeBron James if they had the chance?

[QUOTE=chazzy]This is my point - Raw data shows you everything but you don't know how exactly to interpret similar data sets. You can look at this and say it's about the same, but stats like eFG% and TS% tell you which one is actually more efficient right down to the decimal point[/QUOTE]

And also doesn't tell you things like shot selection and how valuable made and missed shots are to a teams success.

[QUOTE=chazzy]This is my point - Raw data shows you everything but you don't know how exactly to interpret similar data sets. You can look at this and say it's about the same, but stats like eFG% and TS% tell you which one is actually more efficient right down to the decimal point[/QUOTE]

no they can't. ts% is an estimation. it manipulates data. thats all it does. it does not give anything right down to the decimal point.

you are now making this about efg%. which is fine.

i personally want the player that misses less shots. if you have two guys at 25ppg assuming 0 free throws taken, i'll take the guy with a higher field goal percentage almost every time.

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]No, I'm asking what their PPG would be; you gave an example, but just threw out a bunch of numbers without putting them into context. What would those said players PPG be in your example?[/QUOTE]
I'm saying it doesn't matter in regard to eFG% because the total PPG would include points you got from the line, which isn't accounted for in eFG%. You don't need PPG to calculate eFG%

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]And also doesn't tell you things like shot selection and how valuable made and missed shots are to a teams success.[/QUOTE]
Never said it did; those stats measure scoring efficiency only and should only be used that way

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]Jordan in '89/90 on 2's - 942 / 1719 = .548
LeBron last season on 2's - 639/1141 = .550

On considerably less volume, yes LeBron was more efficient. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]
So now volume is important but for three point shooting it isn't? Gotcha.

[QUOTE=chazzy]Never said it did; those stats measure scoring efficiency only and should only be used that way[/QUOTE]

but that is the point. the raw data gives you shot selection and scoring efficiency without manipulation.

[QUOTE=chazzy]I'm saying it doesn't matter in regard to eFG% because the total PPG would include points you got from the line, which isn't accounted for in eFG%. You don't need PPG to calculate eFG%[/QUOTE]

I know what you're saying, but your example was all raw data from FGA to FG and 3PT%. We don't know who was more efficient without knowing what their PPG are.

[QUOTE=Fatal9]So now volume is important but for three point shooting it isn't? Gotcha.[/QUOTE]

When did I ever say that? :wtf:

[QUOTE=chazzy]Never said it did; those stats measure scoring efficiency only and should only be used that way[/QUOTE]

But that's the point, silly goose.

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]But that's the point, silly goose.[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

Its like listing Howard's efg and ts. What does it prove? If you don't know his game, you can't tell if he's just a great ft shooter or 3 point shooter. Its misleading.

The raw data is much better. You'd see he takes all 2's and is actually a terrible ft shooter but gets there a lot.

If you just looked at efg or ts you'd never know what kind of player he is or what his shot selection was or anything.

Howard and Nash have the exact same TS% and have close enough efg%. Do those numbers give you a better indication of overall efficiency as the raw data?

Ohh ok, I thought you guys were saying raw data is superior for efficiency. Yeah it shows you all those other things as well.. I've been talking scoring efficiency this entire time

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Exactly.

Its like listing Howard's efg and ts. What does it prove? If you don't know his game, you can't tell if he's just a great ft shooter or 3 point shooter. Its misleading.

The raw data is much better. You'd see he takes all 2's and is actually a terrible ft shooter but gets there a lot.

If you just looked at efg or ts you'd never know what kind of player he is or what his shot selection was or anything.[/QUOTE]

Right.

According to eFG (solely look at this stat), Dwight and Artis Gilmore are insane 3PT shooters. #1 and #4 all-time as a matter of fact. lol.

You gotta know the game man. Basketball isn't rocket science, which is why coaches always harp on made and missed shots - FG%. Basic statistic that interprets how well you're scoring from the field.

[QUOTE=chazzy]Ohh ok, I thought you guys were saying raw data is superior for efficiency. Yeah it shows you all those other things as well.. I've been talking scoring efficiency this entire time[/QUOTE]

I'm saying that the raw data gives you a more accurate picture of a players efficiency.

I'm not saying TS or EFG are worthless. I'm saying I'd rather see all the variables going into an equation than the outcome of the equation itself. I want to know if one player is taking 5 threes a game compared to 1 for another. I want to know if one player is making 10% more of his free throws and on what volume.

TS doesn't give you that stuff. It just spits out one number that in my opinion can often be misleading.

[QUOTE=chazzy]Ohh ok, I thought you guys were saying raw data is superior for efficiency. Yeah it shows you all those other things as well.. I've been talking scoring efficiency this entire time[/QUOTE]

All good. When we talk about 'beast measure', usually things like shot selection, made/missed fieldgoals being important to your team, etc., is included. Strictly efficiency and no context on how the player impacts the game, well yeah, eFG and TS% are your stats because that's all they account for... numbers.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I'm saying that the raw data gives you a more accurate picture of a players efficiency.

I'm not saying TS or EFG are worthless. I'm saying I'd rather see all the variables going into an equation than the outcome of the equation itself. I want to know if one player is taking 5 threes a game compared to 1 for another. I want to know if one player is making 10% more of his free throws and on what volume.

TS doesn't give you that stuff. It just spits out one number that in my opinion can often be misleading.[/QUOTE]
Then why don't you mind when people only list FG%? Ideally I guess you would want to see FGM/FGA, 3PA and %, FTA and %, along with eFG% and TS%, but I just don't see how only listing someones TS% is any more BS than only listing someone's FG%. Neither one tells the full story on how someone is getting their points, and at least TS% accounts for points earned that FG% disregards completely.

If TS% doesn't account for the misses, then FG% doesn't account for freethrows taken/made and the amount of 3s taken/made.. so there's no reason to call it a bs stat like you always do. TS just gives you a quick gauge of how efficient someone is scoring and nothing's stopping someone from looking up the full set of stats if they want to.