holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knickscity wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knickscity wrote:Even looking at raw data is deceiving. A player takes 10 free throws. If you didnt watch the game you wouldnt know where throws free throws came from by looking at the box score because raw data might not even show a single field goal taken if they missed all five of them, yet got fouled in the act of shooting.

Boxscores will not show 0-5 from the field...10 points

Is this a joke???...That is exactly what TS% does...

Lol, it's derived from an NBA rule thats been there like forever.

You are totally missing the point...You will see 10-10 free throw attempt in the boxscore..So u know it's from shot attempts and not necessarily 2 pt shots, you could get fouled on a three...In TS%, U get credit for 10 pts on zero shot attempt versus a guy who hits 5 layups...Free throw guy is more efficient...

So you're saying a player who is 5-5 from the field is less efficient than a player who hits 10 free throws? TS% does not support that, so stop trying.

TS actually does reward a player who goes 10-10 from the FT line more than 10 points on 5 for 5.

FT's are given a bit of a higher value. Its a very very tiny part of TS and can be argued either way though Holfresh chooses to pound his chest with this one since he has very little else to hang his hat on.

A 3 should not have more value than a 2? C'mon ... even holfresh cant say that with a straight face. Beal and Harden are night and day in their stats though if you are from the 1800's than everyone looks the same CAUSE IT WAS SO DAMN DARK!

The TS% of a player that shoots 10/10 from the ft line with no fg is 114..The TS% of player who goes 5-5 from the field two point shots and no ft is 100..The TS% of a player who goes 9/10 ft and no field goals is 102..So a guy shooting 90% form the ft line has a higher TS% than a guy shooting 100%(5-5) from the field on two pt fg..

TS% is 100XPTS/(2*FGA)+.44*FTA is the formula...There are even more issues using .44 as the fg substitution for ft which is not really exact but I don't want to waste my time on this...

people are gonna argue with any metric.

You however are comfortable with giving equal values to 2's and 3's!! At least there are valid arguments to giving FT's a higher weight but there is no argument to giving 2's and 3's equal weight and certainly no argument to discounting FT's all together.

What's this about 3s and 2s??..What are u talking about?..When did I say they should be equal?
And I'm not sure ft is more valuable in every situation because the equations behaves different with fg..I didn't try testing these scenario..I just saw that flaw and think that any flaw renders it useless..

comparing two players FG's? You don't do that?

You found an article that suggests a flaw in TS .... whoopy! Now you feel that you have an argument to render it useless? Of course that can't be true!

There are many good arguments that Beal and Hardens numbers are equal?

I have an idea ... so that you can start moving into the new millennium a bit more slowly, how about starting with eFg?

It wasnt an article, I did it myself..But I found other articles questioning it with regards using .44 which I agree with..with regards to Beal and Harden it wasn't hard to see..their 3 pt percentage is almost identical..The major difference is ft attempts and percentage..

And yeah I compare fg but in the context of comparing 3pt as well..

how about their 2 point percentages?

you know that hardens FG is pulled down by the number of 3's he takes? I am sure that you understand that this is ok because of the 3 point value, right?

EFG

Harden is shooting close to 10 FTA a game as a rocket. You know why?

mreinman wrote:oh ... one more thing ... lets not use TS to see this, don't need to.

Harden is shooting close to 10 FTA a game as a rocket. You know why?

Head jerks, flopping, and good play penetrating..

I'm willing to bet that Harden tailored his game to take advantage of ts%..

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knickscity wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knickscity wrote:Even looking at raw data is deceiving. A player takes 10 free throws. If you didnt watch the game you wouldnt know where throws free throws came from by looking at the box score because raw data might not even show a single field goal taken if they missed all five of them, yet got fouled in the act of shooting.

Boxscores will not show 0-5 from the field...10 points

Is this a joke???...That is exactly what TS% does...

Lol, it's derived from an NBA rule thats been there like forever.

You are totally missing the point...You will see 10-10 free throw attempt in the boxscore..So u know it's from shot attempts and not necessarily 2 pt shots, you could get fouled on a three...In TS%, U get credit for 10 pts on zero shot attempt versus a guy who hits 5 layups...Free throw guy is more efficient...

So you're saying a player who is 5-5 from the field is less efficient than a player who hits 10 free throws? TS% does not support that, so stop trying.

TS actually does reward a player who goes 10-10 from the FT line more than 10 points on 5 for 5.

FT's are given a bit of a higher value. Its a very very tiny part of TS and can be argued either way though Holfresh chooses to pound his chest with this one since he has very little else to hang his hat on.

A 3 should not have more value than a 2? C'mon ... even holfresh cant say that with a straight face. Beal and Harden are night and day in their stats though if you are from the 1800's than everyone looks the same CAUSE IT WAS SO DAMN DARK!

The TS% of a player that shoots 10/10 from the ft line with no fg is 114..The TS% of player who goes 5-5 from the field two point shots and no ft is 100..The TS% of a player who goes 9/10 ft and no field goals is 102..So a guy shooting 90% form the ft line has a higher TS% than a guy shooting 100%(5-5) from the field on two pt fg..

TS% is 100XPTS/(2*FGA)+.44*FTA is the formula...There are even more issues using .44 as the fg substitution for ft which is not really exact but I don't want to waste my time on this...

people are gonna argue with any metric.

You however are comfortable with giving equal values to 2's and 3's!! At least there are valid arguments to giving FT's a higher weight but there is no argument to giving 2's and 3's equal weight and certainly no argument to discounting FT's all together.

What's this about 3s and 2s??..What are u talking about?..When did I say they should be equal?
And I'm not sure ft is more valuable in every situation because the equations behaves different with fg..I didn't try testing these scenario..I just saw that flaw and think that any flaw renders it useless..

comparing two players FG's? You don't do that?

You found an article that suggests a flaw in TS .... whoopy! Now you feel that you have an argument to render it useless? Of course that can't be true!

There are many good arguments that Beal and Hardens numbers are equal?

I have an idea ... so that you can start moving into the new millennium a bit more slowly, how about starting with eFg?

It wasnt an article, I did it myself..But I found other articles questioning it with regards using .44 which I agree with..with regards to Beal and Harden it wasn't hard to see..their 3 pt percentage is almost identical..The major difference is ft attempts and percentage..

And yeah I compare fg but in the context of comparing 3pt as well..

how about their 2 point percentages?

you know that hardens FG is pulled down by the number of 3's he takes? I am sure that you understand that this is ok because of the 3 point value, right?

EFG

Harden and Beal were identical in 3 point attempt and percentage in their first three years..Identical..The only difference was ft..which is why I knew higher ft means higher ts%..

Not sure if it was you but we can tackle ws48 another day..

identical? Come again?

you are too funny ...

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:oh ... one more thing ... lets not use TS to see this, don't need to.

Harden is shooting close to 10 FTA a game as a rocket. You know why?

Head jerks, flopping, and good play penetrating..

how about limiting and not settling for stupid long 2's and attacking the rim?

btw, PPS: Harden #2, Beal #85 ... just sayin

you know that Harden shot > 49% in year three right? How were they identical through the first 3 years?

What's PPS?..His overall shooting was 49% which was an aberration for his career, he played 62 games that year, he is usually a 43/44% guy but his 3 pt shooting was identical as I said and I would bet Harden tailored his game for ts%..

prolly ... I wish that Melo tailored his game for TS.

Curry, Durant, Lebron all seem to be tailoring their games for TS.

I think that you are right ... Melo is tailoring his game for FG ... oh no!

Btw, Harden's FG is at 44.4 for his career. It was the same exact FG in Houston and OKC. Beal is at 41.9. How is that the same?

How about the 5 point diff in eFG? You are being a joker-er?

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:

holfresh wrote:

mreinman wrote:oh ... one more thing ... lets not use TS to see this, don't need to.

Harden is shooting close to 10 FTA a game as a rocket. You know why?

Head jerks, flopping, and good play penetrating..

how about limiting and not settling for stupid long 2's and attacking the rim?

btw, PPS: Harden #2, Beal #85 ... just sayin

you know that Harden shot > 49% in year three right? How were they identical through the first 3 years?

What's PPS?..His overall shooting was 49% which was an aberration for his career, he played 62 games that year, he is usually a 43/44% guy but his 3 pt shooting was identical as I said and I would bet Harden tailored his game for ts%..

prolly ... I wish that Melo tailored his game for TS.

Curry, Durant, Lebron all seem to be tailoring their games for TS.

I think that you are right ... Melo is tailoring his game for FG ... oh no!

Btw, Harden's FG is at 44.4 for his career. It was the same exact FG in Houston and OKC. Beal is at 41.9. How is that the same?

How about the 5 point diff in eFG? You are being a joker-er?

Bro do u have a reading problem..I said first three years not career because Beal is in the league 3 years and I said three point shooting..

I am talking first 3 years ... reading problem?

and ... who cares just about 3 point shooting? Is Jose C. in play too?