Printable View
Fvck TS%!
Im the only one from the times here people looked at FG% to decide if someone is hitting their shots? Im the only one who remembers when comparison threads didnt have one season TS% and the other one FG% selected.. Im the only one who likes his stats raw?
#FvckTS%
Get off my lawn you damn kids
but TS% looks good because its usually above 50..
Back in my day above 50's usually didnt look good..
[QUOTE=CeltsGarlic]Fvck TS%!
Im the only one from the times here people looked at FG% to decide if someone is hitting their shots? Im the only one who remembers when comparison threads didnt have one season TS% and the other one FG% selected.. Im the only one who likes his stats raw?
#FvckTS%[/QUOTE]
It stands for True Shooting Percentage you dumbass.
[QUOTE=dunksby]It stands for True Shooting Percentage you dumbass.[/QUOTE]
Boy, you dont start what you cant handle.
[QUOTE=CeltsGarlic]Boy, you dont start what you cant handle.[/QUOTE]
Do you have bad breath? Cause I can't handle talking to people who have foul breath.
OP is a dumbass. If you don't like TS then use EFG which doesn't include free throws.
FG actually penalizes players for shooting 3s. If a guy takes a lot of 3s and shoots them at 39% that is good but it typically brings down his FG%
Look at Lillard vs Wall
FG%
Lillard 45.4%
Wall 44.8%
Lillard's is better by .6%
EFG%
Lillard 53.7%
Wall 47.9%
Lillard's is better by 5.8%
FG% is useless unless you are looking at players who don't shoot 3s.
[QUOTE=tontoz]OP is a dumbass. If you don't like TS then use EFG which doesn't include free throws.
FG actually penalizes players for shooting 3s. If a guy takes a lot of 3s and shoots them at 39% that is good but it typically brings down his FG%
Look at Lillard vs Wall
FG%
Lillard 45.4%
Wall 44.8%
Lillard's is better by .6%
EFG%
Lillard 53.7%
Wall 47.9%
Lillard's is better by 5.8%
FG% is useless unless you are looking at players who don't shoot 3s.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, so you also need to use common sense when looking at stats like FG, but I guess thats not for you.
We need a new statistic that doesn't count dunks and layups as shooting.
Brandan wright "shoots" something like 70% but we all know he can't shoot a j if his live depended on it.
[QUOTE=CeltsGarlic]Yeah, so you also need to use common sense when looking at stats like FG, but I guess thats not for you.[/QUOTE]
This from a guy who didn't even know what TS stands for. :lol
Common sense tells us that FG% is basically worthless in the 3 point era. Better to use a stat that doesn't require interpretation.
[QUOTE=CeltsGarlic]Fvck TS%!
Im the only one from the times here people looked at FG% to decide if someone is hitting their shots? Im the only one who remembers when comparison threads didnt have one season TS% and the other one FG% selected.. Im the only one who likes his stats raw?
#FvckTS%[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/angry-old-man-with-computer.jpg[/IMG]
goofy, lame azz stat nerd bullcrap
the idea that there is such a thing as a "true" percentage is so inane, so stupid...I can't.
PPP has NOTHING to do with percentage
they just comingled two completely separate precepts and masquerade is as being "advanced".
The stat basically tells us that a player get's more points more making a 3 point basket as opposed to a 2, just absolutely brilliant stuff :rolleyes: .
"True" completely ignore MISSED shots.
So that if a player make 40 out of 100 three point shots he's just as effective/efficient as a player who makes 60 out of 100 2 point attempts.
They both "effectively" or "truly" shot 60%
NO THEY DID NOT!
you cant award percentage point because they happen to have the same point TOTALS,[B] the 20 extra MISSED shots don't factor in AT ALL.[/B]
Shaq scoring a 120 points on 60% is not nowhere near the same as Kobe scoring 120 on 40%, only a simpleton who thinks he's an intellectual thinks like that (like goofy azz Hollinger and the other "advanced" stat nerds).
OP is the type of person who hates TS% but loves PER and WS.
[QUOTE=riseagainst]OP is the type of person who hates TS% but loves PER and WS.[/QUOTE]
That sh!t stupid too.