Printable View
[QUOTE=Droid101]Once again, fail poster is fail.
If a dude had lines like:
35 PPG 48% FG
33 PPG 49% FG
31 PPG 50% FG
You're assuming those are "worse" than the Jordan lines you commented on?
What if he shot 100% of his shots from 3 point range? Looks a lot better than Jordan's lines now, doesn't it?
:facepalm at you ****ing luddites. Statistics and technology evolve. Evolve with them.[/QUOTE]
Some one tells you player A has a TS% of 55%....player B = 54%...what can you gather from that??
[QUOTE=barnett114]**** the freethrows.
Kobe's TS was higher in 04-05 because he scored [B][SIZE="5"]27.6 PPG on 20.1 FGA[/SIZE][/B]
It was lower in 08-09 because he scored [B][SIZE="5"]26.8 PPG on 20.9 FGA[/SIZE][/B]
[B]It's that simple, [B][SIZE="5"]he took more shots and scored less points[/SIZE][/B].[/QUOTE][/B]
Yeah, cuz he wasn't getting the calls he was in 2005....:rolleyes:
Officiating was affecting his shooting, not his touch....get that straight.
[QUOTE=bwink23]Some one tells you player A has a TS% of 55%....player B = 54%...what can you gather from that??[/QUOTE]
Any number of things.
The main thing is, the dude with the 55% probably scored more points on less shots.......... WAS MORE EFFICIENT SCORING THE BASKETBALL
****ing A you people are dense.
[QUOTE=bwink23][/B]
Yeah, cuz he wasn't getting the calls he was in 2005....:rolleyes:
Officiating was affecting his shooting, not his touch....get that straight.[/QUOTE]
Calls? You realize that some players know how to draw fouls. Some players drive to the rim more (and get fouled more) where some players will stay behind the three point line and just shoot (getting fouled less).
Has nothing to do with "getting the calls." :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm
Considering all the all-time greats shot at a great percentage from the field... and he's in that conversation, things that like tend to come up.
[QUOTE=bwink23][/B]
Yeah, cuz he wasn't getting the calls he was in 2005....:rolleyes:
Officiating was affecting his shooting, not his touch....get that straight.[/QUOTE]
29.4 PPG in '01 Playoffs
30.0 PPG in '03 Regular Season
32.1 PPG in '03 Playoffs
Next
[QUOTE=Droid101]Any number of things.
The main thing is, the dude with the 55% probably scored more points on less shots.......... WAS MORE EFFICIENT SCORING THE BASKETBALL
****ing A you people are dense.[/QUOTE]
Your RREEEAAACHINNGG....so you can only GUESS on what happened....and tell me this, are you gonna look up the FG's, FT's, and 3's as well???
You know you would....so why do you need TS% again??:hammerhead:
[QUOTE=bwink23]Yeah, cuz he wasn't getting the calls he was in 2005....:rolleyes:
Officiating was affecting his shooting, not his touch....get that straight.[/QUOTE]
:banghead:
[B][U][SIZE="4"]He took more shots and scored less points.[/SIZE][/U][/B] It's that simple.
That's why his TS% was higher even though he shot .433 from the field. [B][U][SIZE="4"]He took 20.1 shots to score 27.6 PPG[/SIZE][/U][/B]. In 08-09 [B][U][SIZE="4"]he took 20.9 shots to score 26.8 PPG[/SIZE][/U][/B].
But you need a new excuse because TS% doesn't fit your argument.
The average SG this year is shooting 42.1 FG%, 47.9 EFG%, 52.1 TS%. Kobe is shooting 44.3 FG%, 47.2 EFG%, 53 TS%.
Let's compare to another top scorer:
The average SF this year is shooting 42.6 FG%, 47.9 EFG%, and 52 TS%. Durant is shooting 51.6 FG%, 55.9 EFG%, and 61.2 TS%.
See the difference?
In previous years, it's been the same thing. Kobe shoots approx. average, or slightly above average, for his position. Now, he's still a great scorer, because he can take so many shots, without his efficiency dropping dramatically. Sometimes that means he ends up costing your team higher % shots, when he takes too many himself. Sometimes it saves your team, because he can create for himself, when the defense is shutting everyone else down.
[QUOTE=barnett114]:banghead:
[B][U][SIZE="4"]He took more shots and scored less points.[/SIZE][/U][/B] It's that simple.
That's why his TS% was higher even though he shot .433 from the field. [B][U][SIZE="4"]He took 20.1 shots to score 27.6 PPG[/SIZE][/U][/B]. In 08-09 [B][U][SIZE="4"]he took 20.9 shots to score 26.8 PPG[/SIZE][/U][/B].
But you need a new excuse because TS% doesn't fit your argument.[/QUOTE]He knows he's wrong, and he'll never admit it. Let's not turn this into another "PER and TS%" thread, lol.
[QUOTE=barnett114]:banghead:
[B][U][SIZE="4"]He took more shots and scored less points.[/SIZE][/U][/B] It's that simple.
That's why his TS% was higher even though he shot .433 from the field. [B][U][SIZE="4"]He took 20.1 shots to score 27.6 PPG[/SIZE][/U][/B]. In 08-09 [B][U][SIZE="4"]he took 20.9 shots to score 26.8 PPG[/SIZE][/U][/B].
But you need a new excuse because TS% doesn't fit your argument.[/QUOTE]
does having a TS% higher in 2005 than in make him a more efficient scorer than in 2009 cuz the refs gave him more FT's?? LOL
I THINK NOT>
[QUOTE=bwink23]You know you would....so why do you need TS% again??:hammerhead:[/QUOTE]
You are a [B]fu[/B][B]c[/B][B]king[/B] dumb ass.
True shooting percentage is a measure of shooting efficiency that takes into account field goals, 3-point field goals, and free throws.
[QUOTE=Inactive]The average SG this year is shooting 42.1 FG%, 47.9 EFG%, 52.1 TS%. Kobe is shooting 44.3 FG%, 47.2 EFG%, 53 TS%.
Let's compare to another top scorer:
The average SF this year is shooting 42.6 FG%, 47.9 EFG%, and 52 TS%. Durant is shooting 51.6 FG%, 55.9 EFG%, and 61.2 TS%.
See the difference?
In previous years, it's been the same thing. Kobe shoots approx. average, or slightly above average, for his position. Now, he's still a great scorer, because he can take so many shots, without his efficiency dropping dramatically. Sometimes that means he ends up costing your team higher % shots, when he takes too many himself. Sometimes it saves your team, because he can create for himself, when the defense is shutting everyone else down.
He knows he's wrong, and he'll never admit it. Let's not turn this into another "PER and TS%" thread, lol.[/QUOTE]
Kobe in 2005....43.3%FG, 33.9% from 3, 81.6%FT.
Kobe in 2009....46,7%FG, 35.1% from 3, 85% FT shooter....and you want to tell me he was more efficient in 2005 cuz if his TS%....
PUT THE CRACK PIPE DOWN SON....:hammerhead:
[QUOTE=barnett114]You are a [B]fu[/B][B]c[/B][B]king[/B] dumb ass.
True shooting percentage is a measure of shooting efficiency that takes into account field goals, 3-point field goals, and free throws.[/QUOTE]
[B]Kobe in 2005....43.3%FG, 33.9% from 3, 81.6%FT.
Kobe in 2009....46.7%FG, 35.1% from 3, 85% FT shooter.
[/B]
Thinking Kobe was a more efficient scorer based on some retarded TS%, makes you the DUMBASS SON.:hammerhead:
[QUOTE=bwink23]does having a TS% higher in 2005 than in make him a more efficient scorer than in 2009 cuz the refs gave him more FT's?? LOL
I THINK NOT>[/QUOTE]
The refs didn't "give" anyone anything. Players who drive to the basket get fouled more. Also, skilled players are good at drawing fouls.
bwink23 go back to watching space jam :facepalm
[QUOTE=StateOfMind12]I don't get it.
The league average for FG% from 2000-2010 was around the 44-46% range and that is exactly the range Kobe shot from 2000-2010, so how exactly was he inefficient? How is he also inefficient when he always shot in the 55% to 57% range in TS% when the league average of TS% from 2000-2010 was always around the 52-54% range?
If I had to take a guess though it is because Michael Jordan's FG% was always in the 50% so the fact that his FG% was below Jordan's FG% all of a suddenly makes him inefficient opposed to not being as efficient as Michael Jordan. I think some people need to fix their word usage here because that doesn't make Kobe inefficient, just not as efficient or as good as MJ.
It's pretty funny how bad these MJ-Kobe comparisons have damaged Kobe's legacy.
Here are the actual League average for FG%
2000-2001 - 44.3%
2001-2002 - 44.5%
2002-2003 - 44.2%
2003-2004 - 43.9%
2004-2005 - 44.7%
2005-2006 - 45.4%
2006-2007 - 45.8%
2007-2008 - 45.7%
2008-2009 - 45.9%
2009-2010 - 46.1%
Kobe's FG% from '01-'10 (his prime) +/- means how much better or worse than it is compared to league average.
2000-2001 - 46.4% - +2.1
2001-2002 - 46.9% - +2.4
2002-2003 - 45.1% - +0.9
2003-2004 - 43.8% - -0.1
2004-2005 - 43.3% - -1.4
2005-2006 - 45.0% - -0.4
2006-2007 - 46.3% - +0.5
2007-2008 - 45.9% - +0.2
2008-2009 - 46.7% - +0.8
2009-2010 - 45.6% - -0.5
Funny for three of the seasons of the four seasons where his FG% were seasons where he suffered injuries. (all except '05-'06).
Here are Kobe's TS% and eFG% compared to the league average
Kobe's TS% from '01-'10 (his prime)
2000-2001 - 55.2% - +3.4
2001-2002 - 54.4% - +2.4
2002-2003 - 55.0% - +3.1
2003-2004 - 55.1% - +3.5
2004-2005 - 56.3% - +3.3
2005-2006 - 55.9% - +2.4
2006-2007 - 58.0% - +3.9
2007-2008 - 57.6% - +3.6
2008-2009 - 56.1% - +1.5
2009-2010 - 54.5% - +0.2
Kobe's eFG% from '01-'10 (his prime)
2000-2001 - 48.4% - +1.1
2001-2002 - 47.9% - +0.2
2002-2003 - 48.3% - +1.0
2003-2004 - 46.8% - -0.3
2004-2005 - 48.2% - the exact league average
2005-2006 - 49.1% - +0.2
2006-2007 - 50.2% - +0.6
2007-2008 - 50.3% - +0.5
2008-2009 - 48.8% - -1.1
2009-2010 - 48.7% - -1.4[/QUOTE]
To me he's been on par - he's a bit hot/cold so we see some really bad shooting nights. Superstars should be shooting more efficiently than the rest of the league, tho. Also, he takes a lot of shots when he has a great front court that shoots the ball at a much higher clip than the rest of the league. The thing in favor of Kobe is that he keeps pressure on the defense because he attacks from all over. He keeps coming and its unbalances the defense.
[QUOTE=barnett114]You are a [B]fu[/B][B]c[/B][B]king[/B] dumb ass.
[B]True shooting percentage[/B] is a measure of shooting efficiency that [B]takes into account field goals, 3-point field goals, and free throws.[/QUOTE][/B]
So you don't need TS% AT ALL....right?? Since the info is already there. :hammerhead:
Obviously, if a guy shoots better in all areas of scoring( FG's, 3's, and FT's) he is the BETTER SCORER.....no matter what your stupid TS% tells you....take that to the bank you FOOL>
[QUOTE=bwink23]does having a TS% higher in 2005 than in make him a more efficient scorer than in 2009 cuz the refs gave him more FT's?? LOL
I THINK NOT>[/QUOTE]
:facepalm
[QUOTE=bwink23][B]Kobe in 2005....43.3%FG, 33.9% from 3, 81.6%FT.
Kobe in 2009....46.7%FG, 35.1% from 3, 85% FT shooter.
[/B]
Thinking Kobe was a more efficient scorer based on some retarded TS%, makes you the DUMBASS SON.:hammerhead:[/QUOTE]
Forget TS% and FG% for a second [B][SIZE="4"][U]27.6 PPG on 20.1 FGA or 26.8 PPG on 20.9 FGA[/U][/SIZE][/B]
You don't get it because you are a [U][B]stupid[/B] [B]motherf[/B][B]ucker[/B][/U].
Don't get baited by bwink - he'll never understand how the distribution and volume of your shots matter in addition to the percentages
[QUOTE=chazzy]Don't get baited by bwink - he'll never understand how the distribution and volume of your shots matter in addition to the percentages[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://cms1.good.is/posts/post_full_1284761463math-class-is-tough-barbie.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=bwink23][/B]
So you don't need TS% AT ALL....right?? Since the info is already there. :hammerhead:
Obviously, if a guy shoots better in all areas of scoring( FG's, 3's, and FT's) he is the BETTER SCORER.....no matter what your stupid TS% tells you....take that to the bank you FOOL>[/QUOTE]
Okay bitch, [COLOR="Green"][SIZE="4"]you win[/SIZE][/COLOR].
[QUOTE=Droid101]The refs didn't "give" anyone anything. Players who drive to the basket get fouled more. Also, skilled players are good at drawing fouls.[/QUOTE]
LOL...Kobe was most definately given FT's...but that's not the point..
The point is that Kobe shot better in all phases of scoring in 2009, but shot a worse TS% than in 2005..
That right there aught to tell you how MISLEADING of a stat TS% is....
In TS%, the lower the ratio of FG to FT, the better the TS%..REGARDLESS of how well you really shoot from the field..
In TS%, you can be an excellent FT shooter and a terrible FG shooter, and still carry a higher TS% than someone who does both well, but doesn't get the same number of calls...
Learn how to properly analyze games you idiot.
[QUOTE=chazzy]Don't get baited by bwink - he'll never understand how the distribution and volume of your shots matter in addition to the percentages[/QUOTE]
He a silly [U][B]motherf[/B][B]ucker[/B][/U].
[QUOTE=barnett114]He a silly [U][B]motherf[/B][B]ucker[/B][/U].[/QUOTE]
So you agree that despite Kobe shooting better in all phases of scoring in 2009...that he was a more efficient scorer in 2005, correct???
[QUOTE=chazzy]Don't get baited by bwink - he'll never understand how the distribution and volume of your shots matter in addition to the percentages[/QUOTE]
I'll tell you what i tell all Kobetards on this topic...
CALL ME when a real analyst on ESPN or during ball games EVER brings up TS%.....I won't wait up for that day...SMOKED :pimp:
[QUOTE=bwink23]So you agree that despite Kobe shooting better in all phases of scoring in 2009...that he was a more efficient scorer in 2005, correct???[/QUOTE]
Forget TS% and FG% for a second.
[SIZE="5"][B][U]27.6 PPG on 20.1 FGA[/U][/B][/SIZE]
[SIZE="5"][B][U]26.8 PPG on 20.9 FGA [/U][/B][/SIZE]
And I guess Billups isn't efficient either.
[QUOTE=bwink23]
CALL ME when a real analyst on ESPN[/QUOTE]
[url]http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/29293/dirk-nowitzkis-true-shooting-percentage[/url]
[QUOTE=barnett114]Forget TS% and FG% for a second.
[SIZE="5"][B][U]27.6 PPG on 20.1 FGA[/U][/B][/SIZE]
[SIZE="5"][B][U]26.8 PPG on 20.9 FGA [/U][/B][/SIZE]
And I guess Billups isn't efficient either.[/QUOTE]
cuz of FT attempts.....:hammerhead: You can thank the officiating for that....
FT's and FG's don't mix, and never will.....PERIOD
[QUOTE=chazzy][url]http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/29293/dirk-nowitzkis-true-shooting-percentage[/url][/QUOTE]
Thanks for posting an article a STATISTICIAN wrote, LOL....:hammerhead:
I said call me when an ANALYST uses it...:violin:
[QUOTE=bwink23]Thanks for posting an article a STATISTICIAN wrote, LOL....:hammerhead:
I said call me when an ANALYST uses it...:violin:[/QUOTE]
[url]http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-110302/daily-dime[/url]
[QUOTE=Droid101]Once again, fail poster is fail.
If a dude had lines like:
35 PPG 48% FG
33 PPG 49% FG
31 PPG 50% FG
You're assuming those are "worse" than the Jordan lines you commented on?[/quote]No moron. Those are great shooting stats from the field. I can look at his 3's if I want his percentage there. Same with FT"s. I don't need a lumped together stat that hides bad shooting from the floor and is boosted by FT's. I like to know what he actually did.
[QUOTE]What if he shot 100% of his shots from 3 point range? Looks a lot better than Jordan's lines now, doesn't it?[/QUOTE]Are you asking if he hit 100% of his shots from 3, or what if he took all of his shots from three? If he hit them then he was shooting well from the floor overall. What's the problem?
[quote]:facepalm at you ****ing luddites. Statistics and technology evolve. Evolve with them.[/QUOTE]They don't need to evolve if the game is still the same. You can't use stats that are lumped together for a game like basketball. Baseball? Sure because everyone gets the same amount of at-bats, and they all have to play defense. There is a measurable amount of data that can be broken down in many different ways because there aren't too many variables from game to game.
Basketball is too nuanced for that. Every game is very different than the game before and they all have their own ebb and flow. That's where you stat nerds get it messed up.
[QUOTE=chazzy][url]http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-110302/daily-dime[/url][/QUOTE]
Who is Mike Kurylo again?? Is he some sort of big time analyst or something?? :sleeping
"Anthony has taken 93 field goal attempts to net 108 points, a poor ratio. And while the league average in true shooting percentage is usually around 54 percent, Anthony has a TS% of 50.2 percent for New York. Compare those numbers to Chauncey Billups, who has scored 93 points on only 49 shots, with a 65.5 TS% in the blue and orange, and it's clear who has been the better Knick thus far. "
Judging by Billups 65.5%TS, he would be considered the most efficient scoring guard of all-time...
Just cuz he gets to the line late in games and gets cheap FT's due to his FT%, doesn't make him a an efficient scorer..
He's simply getting much more FT's to FG's attempts than Carmelo Anthony.....TOO EASY
[QUOTE=bwink23]Some one tells you player A has a TS% of 55%....player B = 54%...what can you gather from that??[/QUOTE]
Nothing.
[QUOTE=bwink23]Who is Mike Kurylo again?? Is he some sort of big time analyst or something?? :sleeping
[/QUOTE]
[url]http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/34940/look-whos-shooting-now[/url]
Chauncy Billups in 2011....
40.3%FG, 32.8% from 3, and 90.2% FT's....TS%= 61.7%.
That's incredibly high for a mediocre FG shooter isn't it??
We know WHY that is:
12.3 FG's to 6.3 FT's....DUH :hammerhead: a 2:1 ratio...of course your TS% is gonna be high when your a 90.2%FT shooter, which by the way is what he always his, an outcome not affected by officiating...
Carmelo Anthony in 2011....
19.9 FG / 7.9 FT...a 2.52 to 1 ratio...BIG DIFFERENCE.
TS% = 55.7%
The difference is largely due to the ratio of FT's to FG's....that dude is comparing Billups scoring to Carmelos...
LOL...BIG FAIL right there...that's why a real analyst, he is NOT>
[QUOTE=chazzy][url]http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/34940/look-whos-shooting-now[/url][/QUOTE]
Henry Abbott an NBA analyst?? :rolleyes:
Come on son, you got to do better than that....:no:
Just compare Kobe's FG shooting and FT shooting in 2009 to 2005...
That's all you need to know on how RETARDED TS % is... :no:
[QUOTE=bwink23]Henry Abbott an NBA analyst?? :rolleyes:
Come on son, you got to do better than that....:no:[/QUOTE]
What the f*ck does he do for a living then?
[QUOTE=chazzy]What the f*ck does he do for a living then?[/QUOTE]
pornstar, he goes by the name of johnny sins
[QUOTE=Glide2keva]No moron. Those are great shooting stats from the field. I can look at his 3's if I want his percentage there. Same with FT"s. I don't need a lumped together stat that hides bad shooting from the floor and is boosted by FT's. I like to know what he actually did.
Are you asking if he hit 100% of his shots from 3, or what if he took all of his shots from three? If he hit them then he was shooting well from the floor overall. What's the problem?
They don't need to evolve if the game is still the same. You can't use stats that are lumped together for a game like basketball. Baseball? Sure because everyone gets the same amount of at-bats, and they all have to play defense. There is a measurable amount of data that can be broken down in many different ways because there aren't too many variables from game to game.
Basketball is too nuanced for that. Every game is very different than the game before and they all have their own ebb and flow. That's where you stat nerds get it messed up.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, so that's why the more successful front offices have been leveraging advanced stats for years now.
:facepalm :facepalm