[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

FG % - Does It Mean Anything?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
jimimou
Posts: 23517
Alba Posts: 36
Lame Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/6/2004
Member: #681
USA
12/27/2007  4:01 PM
Here's our average fg%'s. interesting to see who shoots the ball best when given the chance:

Randolph Morris .667
Eddy Curry .537
David Lee .524
Zach Randolph .464
Renaldo Balkman .460
Wilson Chandler .438
Fred Jones .429
Stephon Marbury .415
Jamal Crawford .402
Jared Jeffries .393
Nate Robinson .388
Quentin Richardson .320
Mardy Collins .192
Malik Rose .171

Team Averages .429
Opponents .483
AUTOADVERT
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/27/2007  4:03 PM
Just wondering jimi, if you have access to other #s like efg%

I'd expect with efg% for Nate to be a lot higher.
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
jimimou
Posts: 23517
Alba Posts: 36
Lame Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/6/2004
Member: #681
USA
12/27/2007  4:09 PM
Posted by kam77:

Just wondering jimi, if you have access to other #s like efg%

I'd expect with efg% for Nate to be a lot higher.

efg?
VDesai
Posts: 43302
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
12/27/2007  4:11 PM
EFG% and TS% (True Shooting) are a bit more interesting cause they include things like 3 pointers and Free throw shooting into the equation.

Shooting Efficiency - If there is an on-base percentage in the NBA - a statistic that has traditionally been undervalued - it would probably be some measure of a player's efficiency in scoring points. There's a stereotype that all statistical analysts think Allen Iverson is a bad player due to his low shooting percentage that is untrue because Iverson's ability to create shots and get his teammates better looks is valuable. Still, being efficient with your shots is very important. The two most common ways of measuring the concept of shooting efficiency are Effective Field-Goal Percentage (eFG%) and what this site calls True Shooting Percentage (TS%).

Effective Field-Goal Percentage was popularized by current L.A. Clippers Coach Mike Dunleavy and the Rick Barry's Pro Basketball Bible series. It adjusts for the added value of three-pointers by counting them as 1.5 field goals, thus make it more fair to three-point shooters than field-goal percentage.

eFG% = (FGM + .5*3PM)/FGA

True Shooting Percentage goes a step further by factoring in a player's performance at the free-throw line and considering their efficiency on all types of shots.

TS% = Pts/(2*(FGA + (.44*FTA)))

Former Sonics guard Brent Barry - Rick's son - led the NBA in both categories in 2006-07, posting a 62.6% effective field-goal percentage and a 66.6% True Shooting Percentage. Barry has led the NBA in True Shooting Percentage three times, including twice while in Seattle. Rashard Lewis (58.7%) was the most efficient Sonics shooter by True Shooting Percentage.

highfivesucka
Posts: 20855
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/8/2007
Member: #1246
USA
12/27/2007  4:16 PM
it's like any stat... it tells part of the story. you have to consider Randolph Morris' case, he has a high % but most of that comes (1) in garbage time and (2) on layups/dunks, he's not playing extended minutes taking difficult shots against starters while under the effects of fatigue.

players who play considerable minutes, their FG% is more telling of their game. Q-Brick's 32%, for example, is more accurate than Morris' 66% or Balkman's 46% because neither have played major minutes or taken enough shots to allow their FG% to settle closer to their average.
^precocious neophyte.
highfivesucka
Posts: 20855
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/8/2007
Member: #1246
USA
12/27/2007  4:17 PM
Posted by VDesai:

EFG% and TS% (True Shooting) are a bit more interesting cause they include things like 3 pointers and Free throw shooting into the equation.

Shooting Efficiency - If there is an on-base percentage in the NBA - a statistic that has traditionally been undervalued - it would probably be some measure of a player's efficiency in scoring points. There's a stereotype that all statistical analysts think Allen Iverson is a bad player due to his low shooting percentage that is untrue because Iverson's ability to create shots and get his teammates better looks is valuable. Still, being efficient with your shots is very important. The two most common ways of measuring the concept of shooting efficiency are Effective Field-Goal Percentage (eFG%) and what this site calls True Shooting Percentage (TS%).

Effective Field-Goal Percentage was popularized by current L.A. Clippers Coach Mike Dunleavy and the Rick Barry's Pro Basketball Bible series. It adjusts for the added value of three-pointers by counting them as 1.5 field goals, thus make it more fair to three-point shooters than field-goal percentage.

eFG% = (FGM + .5*3PM)/FGA

True Shooting Percentage goes a step further by factoring in a player's performance at the free-throw line and considering their efficiency on all types of shots.

TS% = Pts/(2*(FGA + (.44*FTA)))

Former Sonics guard Brent Barry - Rick's son - led the NBA in both categories in 2006-07, posting a 62.6% effective field-goal percentage and a 66.6% True Shooting Percentage. Barry has led the NBA in True Shooting Percentage three times, including twice while in Seattle. Rashard Lewis (58.7%) was the most efficient Sonics shooter by True Shooting Percentage.

yeah I remember last year people talking about this, it kind of balances out the fact that raw FG% leaders are always big guys who are only taking layups and dunking the ball
^precocious neophyte.
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/27/2007  4:17 PM
Posted by jimimou:
Posted by kam77:

Just wondering jimi, if you have access to other #s like efg%

I'd expect with efg% for Nate to be a lot higher.

efg?

Thanks VDesai... I looked it up, Nate posts a .388 fg% but a .466 efg%.

Now who can tell me what is a decent efg%? I don't know if .466 is good or not.

lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
12/27/2007  4:19 PM
these tell me that malik needs "more shats"...
jimimou
Posts: 23517
Alba Posts: 36
Lame Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/6/2004
Member: #681
USA
12/27/2007  4:20 PM
Posted by VDesai:

EFG% and TS% (True Shooting) are a bit more interesting cause they include things like 3 pointers and Free throw shooting into the equation.

Shooting Efficiency - If there is an on-base percentage in the NBA - a statistic that has traditionally been undervalued - it would probably be some measure of a player's efficiency in scoring points. There's a stereotype that all statistical analysts think Allen Iverson is a bad player due to his low shooting percentage that is untrue because Iverson's ability to create shots and get his teammates better looks is valuable. Still, being efficient with your shots is very important. The two most common ways of measuring the concept of shooting efficiency are Effective Field-Goal Percentage (eFG%) and what this site calls True Shooting Percentage (TS%).

Effective Field-Goal Percentage was popularized by current L.A. Clippers Coach Mike Dunleavy and the Rick Barry's Pro Basketball Bible series. It adjusts for the added value of three-pointers by counting them as 1.5 field goals, thus make it more fair to three-point shooters than field-goal percentage.

eFG% = (FGM + .5*3PM)/FGA

True Shooting Percentage goes a step further by factoring in a player's performance at the free-throw line and considering their efficiency on all types of shots.

TS% = Pts/(2*(FGA + (.44*FTA)))

Former Sonics guard Brent Barry - Rick's son - led the NBA in both categories in 2006-07, posting a 62.6% effective field-goal percentage and a 66.6% True Shooting Percentage. Barry has led the NBA in True Shooting Percentage three times, including twice while in Seattle. Rashard Lewis (58.7%) was the most efficient Sonics shooter by True Shooting Percentage.

thanks des - wasn't sure about that one. now that you mention it,. makes sense. i was putting the fg%'s up there b/c, like hi5 below says, you can pick any stat and it wont be truly accurate b/c of the other movable factors in the game. take someone like jj2 tho, he plays some minutes, granted not as many as jamal, but their fg%'s are virtually the same - does that mean that jj should take the last shot...no, but maybe jamal shouldnt either
VDesai
Posts: 43302
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
12/27/2007  4:22 PM
Lets look at it again now, with True Shooting Percentage:

NAME TS%
Randolph Morris 72.7
David Lee 58.1
Fred Jones 55.7
Eddy Curry 55.6
Stephon Marbury 53.2
Jamal Crawford 51.4
Zach Randolph 51.2
Nate Robinson 50.1
Renaldo Balkman 46.1
Wilson Chandler 43.8
Jared Jeffries 41.2
Q Richardson 40.0
Malik Rose 28.0
Mardy Collins 27.1

See- this shows you the underlying problem with Eddy Curry- robust FG%, but doesn't get to the line to improve his true shooting enough. In fact, Fred Jones who looks ordinary from FG% has been one of our most efficient shooters cause he hits 3's and hits at a solid rate from the line.

For comparison's sake, the NBA top 20:

NAME TS%
Erick Dampier 65.9
Daniel Gibson 65.4
Josh Childress 65.4
Andrew Bynum 64.4
Steve Nash 64.3
Mike Miller 63.8
Andris Biedrins 63.8
Dwight Howard 63.3
Amare Stoudemire 62.5
Nazr Mohammed (CHA) 62.2
Tyson Chandler 61.9
Kendrick Perkins 61.8
Chauncey Billups 61.6
Anderson Varejao 61.2
Jason Terry 60.5
Derek Fisher 60.4
Jason Maxiell 60.4
Kevin Garnett 60.2
Sean Williams 59.7
Ronnie Brewer 59.6


As you can see, whereas 50-55% is more of a top tier barrier for FG%, you want something in greater than 55-60% for TS%. Other than Lee we don't have a top 50 guy.
jimimou
Posts: 23517
Alba Posts: 36
Lame Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/6/2004
Member: #681
USA
12/27/2007  4:22 PM
Posted by djsunyc:

these tell me that malik needs "more shats"...



i think you need more shats
VDesai
Posts: 43302
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
12/27/2007  4:23 PM
Posted by highfivesucka:

it's like any stat... it tells part of the story. you have to consider Randolph Morris' case, he has a high % but most of that comes (1) in garbage time and (2) on layups/dunks, he's not playing extended minutes taking difficult shots against starters while under the effects of fatigue.

players who play considerable minutes, their FG% is more telling of their game. Q-Brick's 32%, for example, is more accurate than Morris' 66% or Balkman's 46% because neither have played major minutes or taken enough shots to allow their FG% to settle closer to their average.

You have to throw out Morris' numbers right now, its based on 3 shots and 1 game.
VDesai
Posts: 43302
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
12/27/2007  4:26 PM
David Lee had amazing .652 TS% last year. Good for third in the league (he was 7th in the league his rookie year). When you consider how efficient David Lee was at shooting the basketball, you understand why fans keep yelling about him playing more (that and when you look at his rebound rate- but that's a stat for another day).
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/27/2007  4:28 PM
So is it accurate to say that eFG% is a good metric for Jumpshooters and TS% a better metric for Big men. The overlap being TS% is a better stat for guys who get to the line a lot AND take a lot of threes.
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
VDesai
Posts: 43302
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
12/27/2007  4:37 PM
Posted by kam77:

So is it accurate to say that eFG% is a good metric for Jumpshooters and TS% a better metric for Big men. The overlap being TS% is a better stat for guys who get to the line a lot AND take a lot of threes.

I like TS% better in general for all guys. EFG% definitely doesn't bring enough to the table for big men who don't shoot 3's. Part of being a scorer is finding different ways to score- depending on where you play in an offense that can be 3's or getting to the line.
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
12/27/2007  4:39 PM
if you go here: http://www.82games.com/0708/0708NYK.HTM

and click on each player, and the click on "player stats", it breaks down the % of shots a player takes along with their eFG%.

here's nate's: http://www.82games.com/0708/07NYK1A.HTM


Shot   Att.  eFG%  Ast'd  Blk'd  Pts
Jump   75%  .500   57%    3%     6.2 
Close  24%  .360   22%    12%    1.4 
Dunk    0%  1.000   0%     0%    0.1 
Tips    0%  .000    0%     0%    0.0 
Inside 25%  .365   21%    12%    1.5


here's quentin's: http://www.82games.com/0708/07NYK1A.HTM
VDesai
Posts: 43302
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
12/27/2007  4:49 PM
This one's a "no duh!" but remember eFG% will only matter for FG% as the other types of shots, by definition, can't be 3ptrs.

One of the problems with the 82 games shot charts (though it is phenomenal work)is that "Jump" is an extremely broad category. In fact I wish they would seperate 3ptrs from "Jump" since its an easier line of demarcation. I think it would tell a more compelling story.

[Edited by - vdesai on 12-27-2007 4:51 PM]
jimimou
Posts: 23517
Alba Posts: 36
Lame Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/6/2004
Member: #681
USA
12/27/2007  4:50 PM
Posted by djsunyc:

if you go here: http://www.82games.com/0708/0708NYK.HTM

and click on each player, and the click on "player stats", it breaks down the % of shots a player takes along with their eFG%.

here's nate's: http://www.82games.com/0708/07NYK1A.HTM


Shot   Att.  eFG%  Ast'd  Blk'd  Pts
Jump   75%  .500   57%    3%     6.2 
Close  24%  .360   22%    12%    1.4 
Dunk    0%  1.000   0%     0%    0.1 
Tips    0%  .000    0%     0%    0.0 
Inside 25%  .365   21%    12%    1.5


here's quentin's: http://www.82games.com/0708/07NYK1A.HTM

nate may not be the smartest bball IQ guy on our team, but he certainly has heart.
majorleads
Posts: 20536
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/29/2006
Member: #1213
12/27/2007  7:04 PM
Posted by jimimou:



Team Averages .429
Opponents .483

Sweet fancy moses. There ain't no recovering from that. I wonder if it's the worst ever?
http://majorleads.blogspot.com
jimimou
Posts: 23517
Alba Posts: 36
Lame Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/6/2004
Member: #681
USA
12/27/2007  7:22 PM
Posted by majorleads:
Posted by jimimou:



Team Averages .429
Opponents .483

Sweet fancy moses. There ain't no recovering from that. I wonder if it's the worst ever?

funny you should ask. here's the "isiah period":

2006/7
Team Averages .457
Opponents .460

2005/6
Team Averages .455
Opponents .467

2004/5
Team Averages .451
Opponents .465

2003/4
Team Averages .442
Opponents .429
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
FG % - Does It Mean Anything?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy