Basically just FG% mixed with FT%, and also gives extra credit for made 3s
this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
NBA - Main
15 readers
2 users here now
Game analysis, highlights and everything else that is happening in the NBA.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It basically accounts for the "difficulty" of the shot by giving the player more credit for making a 3pt shot over a 2pt shot, and a 2pt shot over a free throw.
Lol.
if you get 20 possessions, and you go 10/20 from 2 in them, you have 20 points and your FG% is 50%
if you get 20 possessions and you go 5/10 from 2, and then 2/5 from three, and in the other 5 you get fouled and go 8/10 at the line, you get 24 points and a FG% of 46.6%
FG% would suggest number 1 was more efficient, TS just takes into account that 3 > 2, and takes into account freethrows as well
Is this why “20 points on 20 shots is not efficient” despite being a 50% FG rate?
Because most players scoring 20 would have a mix or 2s and 3s, which should require less shots to reach 20? Whereas 20 points on 20 2s attempted would be fine?
it’s a way to show how many points you score for every scoring attempt. it accounts for the fact that threes give you more points while not taking up extra attempts, and free throws. the formula is total points/{2[field goal attempts + (.44 * free throw attempts)]}. the 2 makes it make more intuitive sense as a percentage, makes the numbers 60% or 50% rather than 1.2 or 1. the .44 is because over larger sample size, the amount of “scoring attempts” a free throw takes up averages out to .44. if it were all 2 point fouls, it’d just be .5, but because of and-ones and technicals, where they’d be essentially 0, and 3 point fouls, where they’d essentially be .33, it brings that number down a bit. it just tries to capture the different ways a player can be more efficient. someone who goes 4/12 from the field only shot 33%, but if they also went 2/6 from 3 and 8/8 from the line, that’s 18 points on like 15.5 attempts, which is a lot better
https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html#ts_pct
Good page for reference on most modern stats.
I’m not convinced it’s better especially when they say AI is overrated. Dude was a beast.
It's highly debatable how much importance efficiency should be given. In a vacuum it's obvious that higher efficiency should help your team win. In practice though, you can still be inefficient and a winning player because so many other things factor in - pace, tempo, rebounding, second chances, defense, etc.
The other important thing TS% does not encapsulate is degree of difficulty. Not all shots are equal, not all players have comparable defenders on them, some guys get double teamed, some teams run plays for easy looks, etc, etc.
Long and short of it - TS% is an interesting statistical note but really gets overused around here. AI is a good extreme example of a guy who could still win despite being horribly inefficient (or a chucker/ballhog, as we used to call it back in the day). But I really want to pull my hair out when I see people raving about this guy having a TS of 60% and that guy at 58%, as if it means anything.
Regarding degree of difficulty, any thoughts how much effect being the guy who can create in late shot clock situations might affect TS%?
Spitballing, if you're a star who shoots on 25% of your possessions, and in 5% of possessions you are the guy bailing out the offense with a late shot, which we can assume is 20% less efficient than a typical look created within the flow of a successful possession, then you are suppressing your TS% by something like 20% on a quarter of your shooting possessions. That would be something like a 5% dip in TS% vs if you always passed to teammates to take those bad late clock shots.
Simply having a second star player to eat half of these possessions (to say nothing of helping generate better looks overall) would increase this hypothetical TS% by 2.5%. Idk if the numbers are reasonable, but I think they get the point across.
It's basically how many points you score per possession compared to the player that makes a 2point bucket every possession.
So if you hit a 2 point bucket every possession you have a TS% of 100%. If you make a 3 every possession, your TS% is 150%. If you take a 3 every possession but only make 50% of your shots, your TS% is 75%>
field goal worth more, free throw worth slightly less, add together make ts%
10/20 from 2 = 50% FG, but 20 points
10/20 from 3 = 50% FG, but 30 points
This is why FG% is not a good stat. It doesn't take into account the difference in value between 2s and 3s (and FTs). The FG% is the same yet scenario 2 is giving you 50% more points.
TS% = points/(2 * (FGA + .44 * FTA)))
This basically tries to account for the different values that each way to score provides. Scenario 1 has a 50% TS. Scenario 2 has a 75% TS. Huge difference despite the FG% being the same.
It’s a fake stat people like to pretend has meaningful value in basketball
IIRC an easy shorthand is just thinking of it as converting every scoring attempt into a two-point attempt, and determining how efficient that player "uses" possessions. The main flaw with FG% is that it doesn't account for the value-add of shooting from three-point territory, and eFG%'s flaw is that it doesn't account for a player drawing fouls, scoring and-ones, and converting free-throws. TS% pulls all that together into one equation for efficiency. It's worth noting that TS% has to estimate how often a player draws/converts a continuation, so it's not as accurate for small sample sizes.
This is one reason why TS% can exceed 100%: it's possible to score so efficiently that you cannot replicate it with two-pointers alone.
True shooting basically factors in free throws and accounts for the value of each shot (1 point, 2 points, 3 points) and normalizes it to an equivalently “good” 2pt%.
True shooting just used to make superstar looks better then they really are. The they proceed to shoot like crap on end in the po and oh but their ts% is good!