I agree but people always love former players in hindsight. If that's how you feel about Chauncy then I hope you feel the same way about guys like Lowry and Conley since they pretty much are just modern day Billups. Pretty sure Billups is even one of Lowrys mentors when he was coming up.
There's a typo on the y-axis at 9:20 - it should say "FG%" instead of true shooting. Also, someone asked how TS% is estimated: You have to go through the play-by-play to add up a player's *actual* true shot attempts (i.e. find the number of and-1s and 3-shot free throws). Since this is cumbersome (and impossible before 1997), the standard estimate is that a free throw is worth 0.44 possessions - this creates the small error for some players who take more/fewer And-1s than predicted. EDIT: 50% on 2s and 33% on 3s do generate a different number of rebounds, but the difference is generally negligible because 3s lead to fewer offensive rebounds than 2s.
Excellent video - thank you! Something I would like to comment on, regarding an Allen Iverson or Kobe Bryant high volume shooter. Because they get loaded up on, even if they miss a shot, if they've drawn a double team, or otherwise collapsed the D to be out of shape, this can lead to Offensive rebounds. These can either be a put back (brick assists as I call them) or simply another attempt at running Offense against the Shot Clock. Some team mates might struggle to score in a 5 v 5, but when it becomes a 4 v 3, they can get "garbage buckets" on what could be described as a broken play. * Something that could be interesting to check - what is the effective scoring off an Offensive rebound? Eg; Iverson's 76ers were 42% on 1st attempts, but 52% on the 2nd attempt. Or 52% on the 2nd attempt where the failed scorer drew a Double Team. If you catch my drift? This then changes what Allen Iverson actually achieves through high volume shooting. ** Because as Allen Iverson would be loaded up on, this keys the D to double team him, which then changes the quality of the assist for the volume shooter as well. I haven't watched your how much is an assist worth video yet.... [NBA Stats 101: Beyond assists | Passing, shot creation & offensive load] *** And following that thought, what if John Smith's assists were always a successful 3 But Bob Brown's were only a successful 2 Something else that is an issue is, okay, Player X scores 20 points on 2s, and Player Y scores 20 points on 1s. And so Player Y puts foul pressure on the Defense, which either leads to softer play against Player Y, which will hopefully improve his effectiveness, and/or causes the opposing coach to take men out of the rotation - which could weaken both their O + D. What happened to the Sacramento Kings against the Kobe + Shaq Lakers is an example of that. Thank you for your channel. Great insight!
Bruh, this series going to end up being a college course on bball stats. By far the most informative bball videos on youtube. I wish we could clone a few of you for the regular season so we can get in-depth analyses on all the teams and players.
A factor I think is important, but always ignored: Some players are the go-to playmakers late in the shot clock. They take shots where the alternative is a 24 second violation. A handful of those per game would have an effect on all of these metrics.
I cannot stress enough how much I love you videos. Lately ive been intrigued as to how Eric Bledsoe fits as a secondary playmaker next to Giannis despite his lack* of 3pt shooting. Would very much appreciate an analysis into his game. Keep up the great work!
This is awesome. Looking at Chauncey Billup’s shooting slashes you would think he’s like an inefficient scoring guard, but he’s really the opposite. Chauncey has an incredibly high bball IQ, and was an extremely efficient player. Ahead of his time in a sense, didn’t worry about FG% and a large proportion of his shot attempts were 3s which is what.
Lmao I've seen myself follow that rule as I got older because it gets me the most buckets. But I got the strategy mostly from watching Stephen curry which only ever takes a mid range if he's left open
FG% is still an important situational stat, like when you just need a basket. For example, at the end of a quarter, or at the end of a game when it's a 1 point game, when free throws are less likely to be called, you just want someone who can take and make a shot at a good FG%. It doesn't matter at that point that shooting 33% from 3 is equal to shooting 50% from 2, you just need a bucket, so it's very valuable to have a player who can make shots at a good rate from several areas on the floor.
When a guy scores 60 points on 20 free throws. Nobody says he scored 40 points. They say he scored 60. And that alone is why true shooting percentage is by far the more relevant stat than Field Goal Percentage.
I've known about these stats for years because of their accessibility in 2k, but you explain them sooooo much better! My mathematician heart is fluttering
I have to say when I saw the video title and the video I was like "Duuhh. That's like super basic knowledge why bother making a video about it?" But seeing the comments and so many people mentionning friends or people they know that don't understand that, I feel like you did a good job taking time to explain it.
FG% is still useful. If you think of scoring like investing, you'd probably want consistent scoring with low rate of returns more often than volatile scoring with a slightly higher rate of return. In short, there are scenarios when they additional point from a trey is far less valuable than the assurance of getting a bucket in that posession. The most obvious example is when you attempt a game-winner in a tie situation or you're down by one, but scenarios aren't limited to that. That's why points per shot is a useful stat, but a distribution analysis is important, too.
I am soooooo glad you did this! I am a huge Pistons fan and in the mid 2000s during their run I'd always tell my non Pistons fans that Billups was sorely overlooked and underrated. Later in his career he got his due somewhat, but he is a statistical darling who could also play D. People may find this ridiculous but I think he is worthy of HoF consideration, maybe worthy period. He was the engine of a title team that was dominant for years as well as being their most consistent offensive threat and clutch player. The 'Stons slow tempo deflated his stats, not his fault.
What an excellent channel. I truly enjoy your videos. So much knowledge. I love the individual player profiles. The one on Steph Curry in the finals taught me something cause I thought he struggled in that game, but his presence really was huge offensively for the team. The Draymond Green’s profile was great and showed his value as a player. Probably your most prescient was the one on the Greek freak which really detailed the holes in his passing and vision which ended up being exploited by the raptors.
Great video! When I played in college almost 11 years ago, a video like this would have been perfect in educating teammates who thought they should have been playing more or getting more touches. These numbers speak volumes to what type of player you are. Back then everything was "real feel" and it's impossible to tell a person they don't mix with certain units on the court by just a flat FG percentage or other flat statistics. I will use this video to help educate my high school players. Thanks for your great content.
This reminds me about MJ, and in particular that fourth quarter in Utah in game 6 '98. Chicago should not have been in a position to 'steal' that game, as Jordan had shot 2-8 from the field. But even after Stockton hit that 3, they were only down 3. Because Michael had made 4 trips to the line and made all 8 shots. So 25% FG shooting becomes 50% (6-12) on scoring efficiency. And then we all remember what MJ did on those final few plays.
thank you! one thing to add: while field goal percentage doesn't measure offensive efficiency, it does impact defensive efficiency, since missed field goals lead to opponent transition opportunities, which doesn't depend on how many points the missed field goals are worth. so shooting 60% from 2 is actually better than shooting 40% from 3, but only from a defensive perspective.
I absolutely loved the early 2000s Pistons. The run in 2004 is something I'll never forget, and when it comes to experiences I've had as a fan it is probably tops. It also probably has something to do with the fact I was also in college and we'd have giant victory celebrations afterwards. That said, it was so satisfying seeing a team I had suffered with for years get closer over a few years and then break through and win when nobody wanted them to or gave them a shot. I think the Raptors probably had a similar experience, though their big game changing trade for Leonard netted them a top 3-5 player whereas Detroit's big trade for Sheed was obviously hugely important though he was not a MVP level candidate like Kawhi. I would pay good money for a Thinking Basketball breakdown on the 2001-2006 era Pistons (the Ben Wallace years)
The issue with living and dying by the 3 is that in close moments, you are more likely to make a close 2 point FG than a 22 foot three pointer. So on moments where there is 30 seconds left and down by 1. You are far better off going for a lay up. Almost everything you said is correct, except distinguishing at critical moments when YOU MUST get a bucket. It is that reason the Rockets always failed late in close games. Go for 3’s. But when you must score, go for the easy close 2
This is why Kobe’s FG% is so low but his efficiency is almost the same as MJ in his prime years. Ofc, Kobe’s era did not utilize analytics in this way, but he was a complete shot jacker, indiscriminatory between long 2s, midrange, contested 3s, and long 3s. The fact that Kobe was able to register such a strong efficiency in an era of terrible efficiency and shot selection shows how amazing of a scorer he was. This also shows how efficiency analytics has helped James Harden and Stephen Curry realize their full value in today’s game of pace and space and TS efficiency.
@@Floyd_Steel I think it was detailed in one of the earlier videos too that the highest scoring seasons of both MJ and Kobe were both 2.5% TS% higher than average at a similar astounding rate above the average volume for the league as well. Basically identical scoring prowess and seasons in their prime. This is regarding the two individual seasons in which Kobe scored 35.4 and MJ around 37 points per game. Adjusted for era, those are the two most identical scoring outputs in terms of efficiency and volume for two scoring superstars that we can find.
Okay so with True shooting if they shoot a pair of free throws that’s counts as 1 shooting attempt, I love that. That’s what I came here for and this video is beautiful
Can you do a video on the NBA before and after the illegal defense rule that prohibited zone defense was eliminated from the NBA? A lot of people seem to forget about this rule and how easy it made it for players to score in the 80's and 90's. It also highlights just how good some of the defenders where in that era. The rule was eventually replaced with the 3 second illegal defense rule and the elimination of hand checking but it appears this has done very little to increase scoring. In reality the elimination of the illegal zone defense rule has probably impacted the game as much as analytics have and is one of the key cogs that have driven the NBA to a fast paced outside scoring game. I feel like this would be right in your wheel house. I honestly believe this rule change has helped stars of the past keep their tags as greats and has somewhat diminished just how good some of the players are in today's modern NBA. I think analyzing this rule change plays a major part in proving that today's NBA isn't a softer more star friendly league. instead I believe that this proves that this is just a miss conception. Can you imagine the scoring totals if guys like Kobe, LeBron, Harden and Durant didn't have to ever play against a single zone defense?
Would be interesting if you also talked about how shot difficulty interacts with efficiency. Id imagine that theres a niche for guys who specialize in low percentage, high difficulty shots that can rescue an otherwise broken possession. Like dwade for instance.
I spend a very unhealthy amount of my time pulling my hair out trying to sate my very unhealthy obsession with comparing basketball players and teams both current and past..... thank you sir I now believe there may be a god after all. I can die a completed man.
I love this channel so much, so much great content. I'm a basketball nerd, so this kind of stuff is so interesting to me. Definitely gonna support on Patreon when I get paid lol
I personally don't like TS% to figure how efficient a player is because it includes free throws. Star players get calls that, if we are being honest, they shouldn't get. Fouls can be incredibly subjective, putting these players at the line can greatly increase their TS%, this really favors guards. I think the FG% is the purest way to really judge.
During a game, if a player A shot 12/20 at the rim and a player B shot 8/20 from would you say player A is more efficient because 60% > 40% ? FG% doesn't even account for 3 points that's why it's the worst way to mesure someone's efficiency. If you don't wanna account for FT you can still use eFG% but I'd say it's also dumb because FT are a part of the game.
@@macandcheese30 Whay does TS% only ever get mentioned with Kobe? I never hear that stat unless someone is arguing for Kobe. Tim Duncan and Kobe have about exact same career TS%. You really going to sit here and say because of that Kobe was just as efficient as TD!? That’s stupid.
@@jacoblee5796 yes if they have the same TS% they as efficient as each other and to be honest, that shouldn't surprised you since Kobe was a great FT shooter and a pretty good 3 pt shooter. Efficiency is about scoring the most points with the less attempts and since 3 is worth more than 2, it's logic that a good 3 point shooter is as efficient or more efficient than a great post up player. That's just maths
Efg and ts, still we have James Harden that looks efficient because of How many ft he takes a game and those shot attempt that are left out due his flops....he barely shots low 40% with those antics without he would be bellow 40 probably.
One Maybe, but he has become a master of drawing the foul, and the FT is the most efficient shot, and he shoots them at a high %, making him an elite scorer and shooter. You may not like it, but his FTA just add to how he can punish you all over the floor
@@t-mofisher8922 not elite when playoffs comes around and he isn't shooting 10+ ft a game and has to shoot his legs Far out or push with the off arm while throwing a lazy flooter thought
I see the conversation about scoring a lot of points at low efficiency as: if another teammate had taken that shot instead, would they have generated more points? So if the other Sixers were even worse scorers, than Iverson taking a shot on that possession even on 41% FG would lead to more points per possession than the alternative. If you have a more efficient means of getting points on your team, like if your team has a hyper-efficient dunker like Gobert or a deadly spot-up shooter or just better offensive talent in general, then that would be a more efficient way to generate points. Just number of shot attempts don't account for that. Assists only count times you actually decide to pass, do so successfully, and have it lead to points. I wonder if there's a way to account for this. Of course there's no perfect way, but some approximation. eFG% or TS% (or PPP) differential between the player and the rest of the team? Maybe even simplified further into a single shooting stat by weighing "attempts" upward or downward accordingly. That would penalize more shots being taken if the team is efficient and reward it if the team is inefficient. Something like (I'm just spitballing here) for a player X: [TS% of X] / [PPP of the rest of the team], or So if for example Iverson had 45% TS, and the rest of the Sixers scored 0.9 PPP, this adjusts upward to 50% team-adjusted shooting (let's just call it that and use TAS). If another player X had 45% TS, but the rest of his team scores 1.1 PPP, this pulls their team-adjusted shooting down to 41%. A lot of the math and statistics choices here probably aren't right, many of the coefficients would have to be different, but I'm trying to see if I can find some intuition for a method that might be useful. Maybe with some coefficient (number here just made up) for how even one more pass continuing the possession still has some risk. [TS% of X] / [0.9*(PPP of the rest of the team)] For X with 45% TS and the team scoring 0.9 PPP, this moves this new TAS statistic to 45/(0.9*0.9) = 56% TAS For X with 45% TS and the team scoring 1.1 PPP, this doesn't move TAS much, to 45/(0.9*1.1) = 45.5% TAS Other possibilities: differential between the player and next most efficient scorer on the team? Differential between player's TS%, and the TS% of the team (measured in offensive rating / 2) when he's not on the floor? All of the options are flawed though, like how numbers when off the court might be skewed by second units. Differential between player's TS% and the most used line-up not including them's TS%? More complicated and maybe less useful: [TS% of X] / [0.9*(offensive rating of most-used line-up without X)] With a lower adjusting coefficient here for the higher risk of turnovers from a harder pass or more successive passes needed to get the ball to the next most efficient option: [TS% of X] / [0.8*(PPP of next most efficient player after X)] If Gobert has a PPP of 1.36 and Mitchell has a 54% TS, Mitchell could be 54/(0.8*1.36) = still 54%, so Mitchell shooting is about as efficient as him moving the ball forward to try get the team to end a possession with Gobert. All of these would be really flawed though but I wonder if any could be a useful little stat to add another layer of context. I don't even know if any of this makes sense by now actually, I need to go get my coffee. Thanks for your videos, they're fascinating and beautifully made and does make keep me Thinking Basketball.
I like the way you're thinking about this, but my concern is that when you start asking if a player should have passed the ball to one of his teammates, you're turning a scoring efficiency measurement into a playmaking efficiency measurement, and you're getting something different. The best example of this is Russel Westbrook. His efficiency is low partially because his volume is high, but that high volume makes things easier on his teammates because Westbrook takes up so much attention when he has the ball and because his teammates are less tired because they aren't driving into traffic as often.
Great latest podcast episode! I think AD and Kawhi should be switched, I think you often circumvent your own criteria when ranking AD. I'm nitpicking but it was a great listen, hope you make more like it!
Wonder when NBA finally do away with FG% in the stat line and use TS% now. It's not that complicated. Guys like Curry and Harden would be even more appreciated by the casual nba fan
Devvv Because true shooting % can also be misleading. Stephen Curry was 4th in true shooting %. Wanna know who were the top 3? Deandre Jordan , Cedric maxwell and Tyson chandler
Francisco Pizarro what’s misleading about that ...? It literally just tells you that nobody scores more points per shot than DeAndre and everybody with a brain knows why that’s the case and that it’s not translatable to higher volume
Billups contributions were beyond efg. I think he also was also a high vol. Ft shooter with a high pct. Close to 90. Add that to his defense and assists and like non fancy stockton he created foul trouble substitutions and time outs . See 2004.
Curry just averaged 32ppg with 65.5 true shooting percentage. Unheard of. No one, not even MJ, has come close to that level of efficiency. With Curry, there is no curve. It deserves it's own video.
🙃Curry’s 20-21 season is now on a list of records ranking 4th all time in terms of points per 75 possession scoring seasons since 1973. 1.James Harden 18/19 - 36.2 +5.6 rTS 2.Michael Jordan 86/87 - 34.8 +2.4 rTS 3.Kobe Bryant 05/06 - 34.2 +2.3 rTS 4.Curry 20-21 - 34.0 +8.3% TS 5. Russell Westbrook 16/17 - 33.6 +0.2 rTS 6. Michael Jordan 87/88 - 32.7 +6.5 rTS 7. Michael Jordan 92/93 - 32.3 +2.8 rTS 8. Michael Jordan 90/91 - 32.0 +7.1 rTS 9. Michael Jordan 89/90 - 32.0 +6.9 rTS 10. Stephen Curry 15/16 - 31.9 +12.8 rTS 11. Michael Jordan 95/96 - 31.9 +4.0 rTS Curry had a higher volume in 20-21 at 32 ppg but his two most efficient seasons are 2015-16 and 2017-18. His highest relative true shooting is 2015-16 since league average TS% was 54.1% back then compared to the 57.2% it is now. Similar pattern with Jordan. Jordan’s highest volume season was 37.1 ppg on 56.2% TS which was +2.4% TS, but his best scoring season was probably 87-88 where he averaged 35 ppg on 60.3% TS which is +6.5% TS.
Kobe's TS was consistently around 3+ to 4 points above league average from 1998 through 2013. That's very good. And extremely comparable to many all-timers ( Wade, Duncan, Bird, etc( Anybody who thinks he's even remotely close to inefficient is an idiot
Ben, maybe I missed it, but I'm wondering if you can explain the difference between Actual TS% and Estimated TS%? I don't understand how there are 2 different numbers.
Actual TS% is TS% that also accounts for and-ones. For instance if a player get's two and-ones then it will register on TS as 3 shots when it only took 2 shots for those 6 points.
The estimated TS% is the line graphing over the entire season, (kind of like an average of the TS% over the entire season). The actual TS% is the TS% for any single game in that season.
Riley Gaucher Actual TS% is the better stat, but it is difficult to calculate since it requires play by play knowledge. You can’t see from a box score how many trips to the line a player had or if they were and one’s. You can only see FTA. Because of this, an estimator coefficient is used (.44 FTA is roughly equal to trips to the line, but it varies slightly by play style). This estimator coefficient is reliable on a long scale, but over the course of the game, it’s not accurate sometimes. However, the estimator is really accurate over the course of a season to the point where the difference between estimated TS% and actual TS% is quite negligible.
Giving us one more indicator that John Stockton was the best NBA player of all-time. 60.8% TS (9th non-active), 1st steals, 1st assists, 1st points accounted for, played every game in 17 of his 19 seasons (16 consecutive of those double-digit scoring, all 19 seasons went to Playoffs), 21+ PER final 16 seasons, 5th all-time Win Shares (207.7) and also 5th in Offensive Win Shares (142.8). "Basketball John , I got a basketball John , i love the basketball John, John Stockton, ooo ooo ooooh."
@@qwikscopez6619 Just checked it out. Seems like Stockton/Malone losing the finals to the Bulls twice meant they didn't tally on the point system Ben used. I know it is an opinion of sorts, but I think Stockton is a top 3 player of all time; He outperformed Magic during a Magic MVP year and the team was kicking butt, though Stockton was certainly more boring to watch than Magic. I'd still obviously be tempted to take Magic at PG for his height, but Stockton was just insanely good and people don't talk about him in the GOAT conversation because Utah lost both finals in 6 games to MJ superteams (yeah, I'm salty) - ;).
Hey Thinking Basketball. Could you make a video on whether the small difference in percentage points on 3 pointers really makes a difference? Like league average is 36% on 3 pt FG but if you shoot at 39% plus, you are considered to be good. I can't see those 3 percentage points making a difference unless you have James Harden volume.
Instinctively, I think the biggest impact of a few percentage points is the psychological effect on the defense. You will close out a bit harder to a 36% shooter than someone shooting 33%. On that note, I think players and coaches tend to group shooters into tiers. Less than 30%, low, mid, or high 30s and then > 40%.
33% on threes is 1 point per shot, 36% is 1.08, 39 is 1.17 and 40 is 1.20, think of it this way if a team averaged 1 point per shot they'd be a far far below average team with an offensive rating of 100(in this era that's bad as league average is 110), 108 ortg is below average, 117 would be the best offence in the league atm and 120 would be one of the greatest offences ever (top 5), this is all compared to league average mind you so a 110 ortg today isn't the same as a 110 ortg in the 90s for example due to rule changes and whatnot
Does true shooting percentage counting metrics differentiate the different types of free-throw attempts: -Free throws off of made (and 1) or missed (2 or 3 FT) shot attempts --> 1 attempt not 2 -Free throws off of foul without taking a shot attempt --> 1 attempt not 0 For example, 3:32 Here the player had 18 free throws. However, if you consider that he had 9 scoring attempts on those free throws, then he would have been fouled without attempting a shot all 9 times and during his 5 shot attempts (2 made and 3 missed), he wouldn't have been fouled. The reasoning behind this is that if he had missed a shot but gotten and made 2 free throws due to being fouled on that shot, then ultimately he should have a 100% true shooting percentage on that shot since his 2pts resulted off of one action (shot attempt) and no rebound was needed to obtain these points. Instead, by your counting metrics, he would have a 50% true shooting percentage since he would have 2 points / 2 shot attempts (a 2pt FG and a pair of free throws). However, this is inaccurate since these points are the result of one action and therefore his true shooting percentage should be 100% for that shot.
AI always got flack for his fg% but he was drawing 2-3 defenders with those drives and the cleanup was like an unofficial assist because the offence was based on him penetrating and drawing defenders.
Darryl Davis I disagree his basketball iq was very high. He’s one of the smarter players of his era. Lack of passing was probably just him being stubborn and a few bad shot selections which almost any superstar is guilty of on occasion.
Darryl Davis But look at the guys he would be passing to....... unskilled Dikemebe Mutumbo, Eric snow, George Lynch, etc. Do you want them to take contested two’s while shaq is just sagging in the paint protecting the rim or for iverson to just go 1 on 1.
Darryl Davis That a young mutumbo. He’s way past his prime. There’s this thing called SPACING . When iverson is your teams best 3pt shooter, you have a problem.
I find eFG% to be a better predictor of playoff scoring than TS%, especially at the critical moments. I believe it is because the refs don't blow the whistle as often, especially in elimination moments. I think this is the main reason that players who depend on foul calls as a significant portion of their offense (Harden, Paul, Gallinari etc.) seem to regress on the biggest stages. Just a hypothesis.
Message In a Throttle free throw shooting is only bad when you can’t shoot free throws. Jordan and harden are 80% career free throw shooters. True shooting % is flawed though since anyone high volume 3pt shooter who shoots 35% will have a higher true shooting % than a Lebron , Mj or Wade. That’s why Kyle Korver and Jj reddick have a higher true shooting % than Lebron
Forgive my ignorance, I'm still learning about advanced basketball metrics. Is there a stat for ball possession time? And possession vs turnovers? Surely a team, even with low percentage shooting, who possess the ball more, pass well, prevent turnovers, exhaust shootclocks, create steals and blocks, free throws, and rebounds well, can perform at a high level even without high gravity superstars or high percentage shooters. Is that correct? This can be the case in hockey, handball, soccer/football, and rugby. Are there examples of such workhorse team play in the NBA that produced championships without high percentage shooting or superstar gravity?
In basketball, both teams get the same number of possessions in a game. It doesnt matter if you score quickly or slowly except in end of game situations
OneEyedKeys There are stats for team ball possession time, however I don’t know if there is one for individual players. Turnovers given possessions could be calculated with turnover rate, which is a percentage of possessions that end in a turnover for a team, typically recorded for 100 possessions. If you want to look at a team that managed to put everything together without a primary high volume superstar, look no further than the 2004 Detroit Pistons, who won the championship. Ironically, both Chauncey and Ben Wallace, who are the subjects of this video, were the two main players on that team. The highest scorer on that team averaged 17ppg. Most of the players were fairly limited offensively, but they’re arguably the best defensive team ever. The other balanced team I can think of is probably the 13-14 Spurs who won the title. Definitely more ball movement than 04 Pistons but not as good defensively (although still pretty much top of the league). Kawhi won FMVP averaging 17ppg. Some pretty interesting teams in league history.
Do this for a kobe vs lebron vs jordan TS% and above/below league average and you will blow up NBA youtube. Can be done however you want aka choose same age, best years, etc.
Sam None of those guys are even in the top 40. True shooting % rewards high volume 3 point shooters and bigs. Slashers or mid range scorers like wade, Lebron, Kobe , Jordan are good in true shooting % but not great
Your videos make ESPN analysts look like a joke
Espn is a joke
They make themselves look like a joke
ESPN is surface-value entertainment, not analysis.
They make themselves look like a joke
Eric L Your comment is very accurate.
Probably my most efficient subscription on UA-cam
right, i feel smarter after every video
True Subscription%
Anything that highlights Chauncey, I'm here for.
One of the most underrated players ever since he doesn't tick the most obvious boxes
He's my all time favorite player. So the second I see his name anywhere I click...
TizOnly1 You ever read the Bill Simmons column debunking Mr. Big Shot? Lol
I agree but people always love former players in hindsight. If that's how you feel about Chauncy then I hope you feel the same way about guys like Lowry and Conley since they pretty much are just modern day Billups. Pretty sure Billups is even one of Lowrys mentors when he was coming up.
R. B. What? How is Conley like Billups? Conley has actually risen to the occasion everytime when it mattered..
R. B. Lowry is solid but Chauncey was called mr big shot for a reason Lowry? Not so much that’s the difference between them.
There's a typo on the y-axis at 9:20 - it should say "FG%" instead of true shooting. Also, someone asked how TS% is estimated: You have to go through the play-by-play to add up a player's *actual* true shot attempts (i.e. find the number of and-1s and 3-shot free throws). Since this is cumbersome (and impossible before 1997), the standard estimate is that a free throw is worth 0.44 possessions - this creates the small error for some players who take more/fewer And-1s than predicted.
EDIT: 50% on 2s and 33% on 3s do generate a different number of rebounds, but the difference is generally negligible because 3s lead to fewer offensive rebounds than 2s.
Excellent video - thank you!
Something I would like to comment on, regarding an Allen Iverson or Kobe Bryant high volume shooter.
Because they get loaded up on, even if they miss a shot, if they've drawn a double team, or otherwise collapsed the D to be out of shape, this can lead to Offensive rebounds.
These can either be a put back (brick assists as I call them) or simply another attempt at running Offense against the Shot Clock.
Some team mates might struggle to score in a 5 v 5, but when it becomes a 4 v 3, they can get "garbage buckets" on what could be described as a broken play.
* Something that could be interesting to check - what is the effective scoring off an Offensive rebound?
Eg; Iverson's 76ers were 42% on 1st attempts, but 52% on the 2nd attempt. Or 52% on the 2nd attempt where the failed scorer drew a Double Team.
If you catch my drift?
This then changes what Allen Iverson actually achieves through high volume shooting.
** Because as Allen Iverson would be loaded up on, this keys the D to double team him, which then changes the quality of the assist for the volume shooter as well.
I haven't watched your how much is an assist worth video yet.... [NBA Stats 101: Beyond assists | Passing, shot creation & offensive load]
*** And following that thought, what if John Smith's assists were always a successful 3
But Bob Brown's were only a successful 2
Something else that is an issue is, okay, Player X scores 20 points on 2s, and Player Y scores 20 points on 1s.
And so Player Y puts foul pressure on the Defense, which either leads to softer play against Player Y, which will hopefully improve his effectiveness, and/or causes the opposing coach to take men out of the rotation - which could weaken both their O + D.
What happened to the Sacramento Kings against the Kobe + Shaq Lakers is an example of that.
Thank you for your channel.
Great insight!
Bruh, this series going to end up being a college course on bball stats. By far the most informative bball videos on youtube.
I wish we could clone a few of you for the regular season so we can get in-depth analyses on all the teams and players.
A factor I think is important, but always ignored: Some players are the go-to playmakers late in the shot clock. They take shots where the alternative is a 24 second violation. A handful of those per game would have an effect on all of these metrics.
kobe bean bryant
Jordan rookie year most of his 3s were end of quarter "throw it for luck" shots so it's very low percentage
Rui hachimura rn
Chauncey Billups' avatar out here looking like Steve Harvey
This videos are just so good. A bit difficult sometimes, but really well explained and edited.
Best NBA channel material right here.
Yeah I just rewatch or rewind if I have trouble keeping up.
I cannot stress enough how much I love you videos. Lately ive been intrigued as to how Eric Bledsoe fits as a secondary playmaker next to Giannis despite his lack* of 3pt shooting. Would very much appreciate an analysis into his game. Keep up the great work!
I wouldn't say bledsoe is a bad 3pt shooter, maybe an average shooter
@@jonathanmitchell3545 he was one of the worst spot up shooters in the league last season which was the crux of how the raptors stopped giannis
This is awesome. Looking at Chauncey Billup’s shooting slashes you would think he’s like an inefficient scoring guard, but he’s really the opposite. Chauncey has an incredibly high bball IQ, and was an extremely efficient player. Ahead of his time in a sense, didn’t worry about FG% and a large proportion of his shot attempts were 3s which is what.
2 points isn't 2 points. I'll explain it to you later
You're down 1 point, whether you make two free throws or make any basket you win the game, 2 points is 2 points
@@qwikscopez6619 I don't think you got the reference he was making :P
@@MastaBlastaS99 Welp evidently not, my bad lol
@@qwikscopez6619 it's a LeBron quote, I was just being silly lol
@@peterlopinto yeah apologies lol
I came up with the "shoot a 3 or a layup" strategy when i spent way too much time playing nba live as a kid
Lmao I've seen myself follow that rule as I got older because it gets me the most buckets. But I got the strategy mostly from watching Stephen curry which only ever takes a mid range if he's left open
FG% is still an important situational stat, like when you just need a basket. For example, at the end of a quarter, or at the end of a game when it's a 1 point game, when free throws are less likely to be called, you just want someone who can take and make a shot at a good FG%. It doesn't matter at that point that shooting 33% from 3 is equal to shooting 50% from 2, you just need a bucket, so it's very valuable to have a player who can make shots at a good rate from several areas on the floor.
When I think the videos can't get any better... This magic statistics wizard drops.
Best content on UA-cam right now
When a guy scores 60 points on 20 free throws. Nobody says he scored 40 points. They say he scored 60. And that alone is why true shooting percentage is by far the more relevant stat than Field Goal Percentage.
I've known about these stats for years because of their accessibility in 2k, but you explain them sooooo much better! My mathematician heart is fluttering
I have to say when I saw the video title and the video I was like "Duuhh. That's like super basic knowledge why bother making a video about it?" But seeing the comments and so many people mentionning friends or people they know that don't understand that, I feel like you did a good job taking time to explain it.
the average casual bball fan probably doesn't know this. But most hardcore fans should know
That's why some players are continually overrated.
@@IndianaSmallmouth that's a good point. i can't even listen anymore "analysts" such as ESPN bunch because of that.
FG% is still useful. If you think of scoring like investing, you'd probably want consistent scoring with low rate of returns more often than volatile scoring with a slightly higher rate of return. In short, there are scenarios when they additional point from a trey is far less valuable than the assurance of getting a bucket in that posession. The most obvious example is when you attempt a game-winner in a tie situation or you're down by one, but scenarios aren't limited to that. That's why points per shot is a useful stat, but a distribution analysis is important, too.
I am soooooo glad you did this! I am a huge Pistons fan and in the mid 2000s during their run I'd always tell my non Pistons fans that Billups was sorely overlooked and underrated. Later in his career he got his due somewhat, but he is a statistical darling who could also play D. People may find this ridiculous but I think he is worthy of HoF consideration, maybe worthy period. He was the engine of a title team that was dominant for years as well as being their most consistent offensive threat and clutch player. The 'Stons slow tempo deflated his stats, not his fault.
Best basketball analysis channel ever, perhaps only rivaled my coach Nick
What an excellent channel. I truly enjoy your videos. So much knowledge. I love the individual player profiles. The one on Steph Curry in the finals taught me something cause I thought he struggled in that game, but his presence really was huge offensively for the team. The Draymond Green’s profile was great and showed his value as a player. Probably your most prescient was the one on the Greek freak which really detailed the holes in his passing and vision which ended up being exploited by the raptors.
Great video! When I played in college almost 11 years ago, a video like this would have been perfect in educating teammates who thought they should have been playing more or getting more touches. These numbers speak volumes to what type of player you are. Back then everything was "real feel" and it's impossible to tell a person they don't mix with certain units on the court by just a flat FG percentage or other flat statistics. I will use this video to help educate my high school players. Thanks for your great content.
You give new understanding to analytics and why it's taken over the game !!!📚🏀📚🏀🙌
This is why we need to eliminate field goal percentage and separate two threes and paint percentages
This reminds me about MJ, and in particular that fourth quarter in Utah in game 6 '98. Chicago should not have been in a position to 'steal' that game, as Jordan had shot 2-8 from the field. But even after Stockton hit that 3, they were only down 3. Because Michael had made 4 trips to the line and made all 8 shots. So 25% FG shooting becomes 50% (6-12) on scoring efficiency. And then we all remember what MJ did on those final few plays.
thank you! one thing to add: while field goal percentage doesn't measure offensive efficiency, it does impact defensive efficiency, since missed field goals lead to opponent transition opportunities, which doesn't depend on how many points the missed field goals are worth. so shooting 60% from 2 is actually better than shooting 40% from 3, but only from a defensive perspective.
Great work, Ben. I love the normal distributions, of course. The clarity is spot-on as always.
Thanks Ray.
bravo! i’m sad at the end of each episode. truly a wonderful program. thanks.
this is by far the best basketball channel on YT
Thank you for this! Sometimes it’s hard to follow all the different metrics you use in your vids so this was very helpful
hours of research condensed to around 10 minutes I love it
I absolutely loved the early 2000s Pistons. The run in 2004 is something I'll never forget, and when it comes to experiences I've had as a fan it is probably tops. It also probably has something to do with the fact I was also in college and we'd have giant victory celebrations afterwards. That said, it was so satisfying seeing a team I had suffered with for years get closer over a few years and then break through and win when nobody wanted them to or gave them a shot. I think the Raptors probably had a similar experience, though their big game changing trade for Leonard netted them a top 3-5 player whereas Detroit's big trade for Sheed was obviously hugely important though he was not a MVP level candidate like Kawhi. I would pay good money for a Thinking Basketball breakdown on the 2001-2006 era Pistons (the Ben Wallace years)
The issue with living and dying by the 3 is that in close moments, you are more likely to make a close 2 point FG than a 22 foot three pointer. So on moments where there is 30 seconds left and down by 1. You are far better off going for a lay up. Almost everything you said is correct, except distinguishing at critical moments when YOU MUST get a bucket. It is that reason the Rockets always failed late in close games. Go for 3’s. But when you must score, go for the easy close 2
Gotta factor in fatigue & leg soreness as well. You're not jumping as well in the fourth quarter as you are in the first or second.
The issue with that is if you had made fewer 3s up until that point it would not have been a close game, you would have just lost.
This is why Kobe’s FG% is so low but his efficiency is almost the same as MJ in his prime years. Ofc, Kobe’s era did not utilize analytics in this way, but he was a complete shot jacker, indiscriminatory between long 2s, midrange, contested 3s, and long 3s. The fact that Kobe was able to register such a strong efficiency in an era of terrible efficiency and shot selection shows how amazing of a scorer he was. This also shows how efficiency analytics has helped James Harden and Stephen Curry realize their full value in today’s game of pace and space and TS efficiency.
Kobe's FG% has always been league average or above league average his entire career and his efficiency actually went up in the playoffs
@@Floyd_Steel I think it was detailed in one of the earlier videos too that the highest scoring seasons of both MJ and Kobe were both 2.5% TS% higher than average at a similar astounding rate above the average volume for the league as well. Basically identical scoring prowess and seasons in their prime. This is regarding the two individual seasons in which Kobe scored 35.4 and MJ around 37 points per game. Adjusted for era, those are the two most identical scoring outputs in terms of efficiency and volume for two scoring superstars that we can find.
@@MarcusExum97 maybe one season, overall jordon was definitely more efficient than kobe, at his peak
SoloPerICommenti The amount between them is significant but not as big as you think because Kobe shot more 3's
@@Herosennin well, Kobe is a +2%, jordon a +5-6%, I think it is significant
Okay so with True shooting if they shoot a pair of free throws that’s counts as 1 shooting attempt, I love that.
That’s what I came here for and this video is beautiful
Absolutely geeking out at these videos. Thank you. Can’t wait for more
Can you do a video on the NBA before and after the illegal defense rule that prohibited zone defense was eliminated from the NBA? A lot of people seem to forget about this rule and how easy it made it for players to score in the 80's and 90's. It also highlights just how good some of the defenders where in that era. The rule was eventually replaced with the 3 second illegal defense rule and the elimination of hand checking but it appears this has done very little to increase scoring. In reality the elimination of the illegal zone defense rule has probably impacted the game as much as analytics have and is one of the key cogs that have driven the NBA to a fast paced outside scoring game.
I feel like this would be right in your wheel house. I honestly believe this rule change has helped stars of the past keep their tags as greats and has somewhat diminished just how good some of the players are in today's modern NBA. I think analyzing this rule change plays a major part in proving that today's NBA isn't a softer more star friendly league. instead I believe that this proves that this is just a miss conception.
Can you imagine the scoring totals if guys like Kobe, LeBron, Harden and Durant didn't have to ever play against a single zone defense?
thank you for all your videos fuelling both my nerdiness and basketball fandom
Stats 101 is my favorite show
Would be interesting if you also talked about how shot difficulty interacts with efficiency. Id imagine that theres a niche for guys who specialize in low percentage, high difficulty shots that can rescue an otherwise broken possession. Like dwade for instance.
Amazing video, I'll just refer to this video in the future when I am trying to have an argument about efficiency .
so in essence, True Shooting Percentage is a weighted average of all ways to score points over total possessions.
Yes
You release such fascinating content. I always leave for podcasts and videos feeling smarter than when I entered.
You could be making this up, I'd still listen and enjoy. Thanks for the videos!
Man you're a GENIUS! I love those kind of videos!
I spend a very unhealthy amount of my time pulling my hair out trying to sate my very unhealthy obsession with comparing basketball players and teams both current and past..... thank you sir I now believe there may be a god after all. I can die a completed man.
You have my favorite videos on UA-cam! Thanks so much for this content
I love this channel so much, so much great content. I'm a basketball nerd, so this kind of stuff is so interesting to me. Definitely gonna support on Patreon when I get paid lol
Ι would love to see a video just about curry or durant using the metrics shown here !
best hoops content on the web. thank you sir!!!
What a channel.
I love that your videos make so much sense keep it up
Wallace's depiction in this vid looks like Sho'nuff from The Last Dragon.
I'd be really glad to see an analysis of Carmelo's game.
I personally don't like TS% to figure how efficient a player is because it includes free throws. Star players get calls that, if we are being honest, they shouldn't get. Fouls can be incredibly subjective, putting these players at the line can greatly increase their TS%, this really favors guards. I think the FG% is the purest way to really judge.
During a game, if a player A shot 12/20 at the rim and a player B shot 8/20 from would you say player A is more efficient because 60% > 40% ? FG% doesn't even account for 3 points that's why it's the worst way to mesure someone's efficiency. If you don't wanna account for FT you can still use eFG% but I'd say it's also dumb because FT are a part of the game.
@@macandcheese30 Whay does TS% only ever get mentioned with Kobe? I never hear that stat unless someone is arguing for Kobe.
Tim Duncan and Kobe have about exact same career TS%. You really going to sit here and say because of that Kobe was just as efficient as TD!? That’s stupid.
@@jacoblee5796 yes if they have the same TS% they as efficient as each other and to be honest, that shouldn't surprised you since Kobe was a great FT shooter and a pretty good 3 pt shooter. Efficiency is about scoring the most points with the less attempts and since 3 is worth more than 2, it's logic that a good 3 point shooter is as efficient or more efficient than a great post up player. That's just maths
That Ben Wallace face though.
At last someone says it fg is a false stat. Now we have efg and ts
There are no false stats, only people who don't know how to read them
SoloPerICommenti ok, agree, I’ll call it false because most of the people read it wrong, lol.
Efg and ts, still we have James Harden that looks efficient because of How many ft he takes a game and those shot attempt that are left out due his flops....he barely shots low 40% with those antics without he would be bellow 40 probably.
One Maybe, but he has become a master of drawing the foul, and the FT is the most efficient shot, and he shoots them at a high %, making him an elite scorer and shooter. You may not like it, but his FTA just add to how he can punish you all over the floor
@@t-mofisher8922 not elite when playoffs comes around and he isn't shooting 10+ ft a game and has to shoot his legs Far out or push with the off arm while throwing a lazy flooter thought
These are the best videos......ever
I see the conversation about scoring a lot of points at low efficiency as: if another teammate had taken that shot instead, would they have generated more points? So if the other Sixers were even worse scorers, than Iverson taking a shot on that possession even on 41% FG would lead to more points per possession than the alternative.
If you have a more efficient means of getting points on your team, like if your team has a hyper-efficient dunker like Gobert or a deadly spot-up shooter or just better offensive talent in general, then that would be a more efficient way to generate points. Just number of shot attempts don't account for that. Assists only count times you actually decide to pass, do so successfully, and have it lead to points.
I wonder if there's a way to account for this. Of course there's no perfect way, but some approximation. eFG% or TS% (or PPP) differential between the player and the rest of the team? Maybe even simplified further into a single shooting stat by weighing "attempts" upward or downward accordingly. That would penalize more shots being taken if the team is efficient and reward it if the team is inefficient.
Something like (I'm just spitballing here) for a player X:
[TS% of X] / [PPP of the rest of the team], or
So if for example Iverson had 45% TS, and the rest of the Sixers scored 0.9 PPP, this adjusts upward to 50% team-adjusted shooting (let's just call it that and use TAS).
If another player X had 45% TS, but the rest of his team scores 1.1 PPP, this pulls their team-adjusted shooting down to 41%.
A lot of the math and statistics choices here probably aren't right, many of the coefficients would have to be different, but I'm trying to see if I can find some intuition for a method that might be useful.
Maybe with some coefficient (number here just made up) for how even one more pass continuing the possession still has some risk.
[TS% of X] / [0.9*(PPP of the rest of the team)]
For X with 45% TS and the team scoring 0.9 PPP, this moves this new TAS statistic to 45/(0.9*0.9) = 56% TAS
For X with 45% TS and the team scoring 1.1 PPP, this doesn't move TAS much, to 45/(0.9*1.1) = 45.5% TAS
Other possibilities: differential between the player and next most efficient scorer on the team? Differential between player's TS%, and the TS% of the team (measured in offensive rating / 2) when he's not on the floor? All of the options are flawed though, like how numbers when off the court might be skewed by second units. Differential between player's TS% and the most used line-up not including them's TS%? More complicated and maybe less useful:
[TS% of X] / [0.9*(offensive rating of most-used line-up without X)]
With a lower adjusting coefficient here for the higher risk of turnovers from a harder pass or more successive passes needed to get the ball to the next most efficient option:
[TS% of X] / [0.8*(PPP of next most efficient player after X)]
If Gobert has a PPP of 1.36 and Mitchell has a 54% TS, Mitchell could be 54/(0.8*1.36) = still 54%, so Mitchell shooting is about as efficient as him moving the ball forward to try get the team to end a possession with Gobert.
All of these would be really flawed though but I wonder if any could be a useful little stat to add another layer of context. I don't even know if any of this makes sense by now actually, I need to go get my coffee. Thanks for your videos, they're fascinating and beautifully made and does make keep me Thinking Basketball.
I like the way you're thinking about this, but my concern is that when you start asking if a player should have passed the ball to one of his teammates, you're turning a scoring efficiency measurement into a playmaking efficiency measurement, and you're getting something different. The best example of this is Russel Westbrook. His efficiency is low partially because his volume is high, but that high volume makes things easier on his teammates because Westbrook takes up so much attention when he has the ball and because his teammates are less tired because they aren't driving into traffic as often.
Great latest podcast episode! I think AD and Kawhi should be switched, I think you often circumvent your own criteria when ranking AD. I'm nitpicking but it was a great listen, hope you make more like it!
Wonder when NBA finally do away with FG% in the stat line and use TS% now. It's not that complicated. Guys like Curry and Harden would be even more appreciated by the casual nba fan
Most NBA fans really don’t appreciate how great those 2 are
No stat would make me appreciate Harden playstyle and antics.
TS% isn't as reliable with sibgle-game sample sizes, but they should use eFG% and FT% or 2%/3%/FT%
Devvv Because true shooting % can also be misleading. Stephen Curry was 4th in true shooting %. Wanna know who were the top 3? Deandre Jordan , Cedric maxwell and Tyson chandler
Francisco Pizarro what’s misleading about that ...? It literally just tells you that nobody scores more points per shot than DeAndre and everybody with a brain knows why that’s the case and that it’s not translatable to higher volume
Billups contributions were beyond efg. I think he also was also a high vol. Ft shooter with a high pct. Close to 90. Add that to his defense and assists and like non fancy stockton he created foul trouble substitutions and time outs . See 2004.
Curry just averaged 32ppg with 65.5 true shooting percentage. Unheard of. No one, not even MJ, has come close to that level of efficiency. With Curry, there is no curve. It deserves it's own video.
🙃Curry’s 20-21 season is now on a list of records ranking 4th all time in terms of points per 75 possession scoring seasons since 1973.
1.James Harden 18/19 - 36.2 +5.6 rTS
2.Michael Jordan 86/87 - 34.8 +2.4 rTS
3.Kobe Bryant 05/06 - 34.2 +2.3 rTS
4.Curry 20-21 - 34.0 +8.3% TS
5. Russell Westbrook 16/17 - 33.6 +0.2 rTS
6. Michael Jordan 87/88 - 32.7 +6.5 rTS
7. Michael Jordan 92/93 - 32.3 +2.8 rTS
8. Michael Jordan 90/91 - 32.0 +7.1 rTS
9. Michael Jordan 89/90 - 32.0 +6.9 rTS
10. Stephen Curry 15/16 - 31.9 +12.8 rTS
11. Michael Jordan 95/96 - 31.9 +4.0 rTS
Curry had a higher volume in 20-21 at 32 ppg but his two most efficient seasons are 2015-16 and 2017-18. His highest relative true shooting is 2015-16 since league average TS% was 54.1% back then compared to the 57.2% it is now.
Similar pattern with Jordan. Jordan’s highest volume season was 37.1 ppg on 56.2% TS which was +2.4% TS, but his best scoring season was probably 87-88 where he averaged 35 ppg on 60.3% TS which is +6.5% TS.
Great. Now I can tell people than my .007 Shooting Percentage is an analytics misstep and that I'm actually Larry Bird in the rough.
Love all your videos, on the topic of efficiency, I would love to see an analysis of whether kobe was inefficient or not
Kobe's TS was consistently around 3+ to 4 points above league average from 1998 through 2013. That's very good.
And extremely comparable to many all-timers ( Wade, Duncan, Bird, etc(
Anybody who thinks he's even remotely close to inefficient is an idiot
I love the probability curve and how the math works
Wow, great video man! 👍🏻
Love the videos, keep it up!!
Amazing video
Ben, maybe I missed it, but I'm wondering if you can explain the difference between Actual TS% and Estimated TS%? I don't understand how there are 2 different numbers.
Actual TS% is TS% that also accounts for and-ones. For instance if a player get's two and-ones then it will register on TS as 3 shots when it only took 2 shots for those 6 points.
The estimated TS% is the line graphing over the entire season, (kind of like an average of the TS% over the entire season). The actual TS% is the TS% for any single game in that season.
Riley Gaucher Actual TS% is the better stat, but it is difficult to calculate since it requires play by play knowledge. You can’t see from a box score how many trips to the line a player had or if they were and one’s. You can only see FTA. Because of this, an estimator coefficient is used (.44 FTA is roughly equal to trips to the line, but it varies slightly by play style). This estimator coefficient is reliable on a long scale, but over the course of the game, it’s not accurate sometimes. However, the estimator is really accurate over the course of a season to the point where the difference between estimated TS% and actual TS% is quite negligible.
Giving us one more indicator that John Stockton was the best NBA player of all-time.
60.8% TS (9th non-active), 1st steals, 1st assists, 1st points accounted for, played every game in 17 of his 19 seasons (16 consecutive of those double-digit scoring, all 19 seasons went to Playoffs), 21+ PER final 16 seasons, 5th all-time Win Shares (207.7) and also 5th in Offensive Win Shares (142.8).
"Basketball John
,
I got a basketball John
,
i love the basketball John, John Stockton, ooo ooo ooooh."
Have a look at his backpicks breakdown (done by thinking basketball) and youll see Ben isn't a fan of stockton
@@qwikscopez6619 Just checked it out. Seems like Stockton/Malone losing the finals to the Bulls twice meant they didn't tally on the point system Ben used. I know it is an opinion of sorts, but I think Stockton is a top 3 player of all time; He outperformed Magic during a Magic MVP year and the team was kicking butt, though Stockton was certainly more boring to watch than Magic. I'd still obviously be tempted to take Magic at PG for his height, but Stockton was just insanely good and people don't talk about him in the GOAT conversation because Utah lost both finals in 6 games to MJ superteams (yeah, I'm salty) - ;).
@@Player_Review 🤡🤡
Great work.
Hey Thinking Basketball. Could you make a video on whether the small difference in percentage points on 3 pointers really makes a difference? Like league average is 36% on 3 pt FG but if you shoot at 39% plus, you are considered to be good. I can't see those 3 percentage points making a difference unless you have James Harden volume.
Instinctively, I think the biggest impact of a few percentage points is the psychological effect on the defense. You will close out a bit harder to a 36% shooter than someone shooting 33%. On that note, I think players and coaches tend to group shooters into tiers. Less than 30%, low, mid, or high 30s and then > 40%.
33% on threes is 1 point per shot, 36% is 1.08, 39 is 1.17 and 40 is 1.20, think of it this way if a team averaged 1 point per shot they'd be a far far below average team with an offensive rating of 100(in this era that's bad as league average is 110), 108 ortg is below average, 117 would be the best offence in the league atm and 120 would be one of the greatest offences ever (top 5), this is all compared to league average mind you so a 110 ortg today isn't the same as a 110 ortg in the 90s for example due to rule changes and whatnot
Fantasy NBA analysts will beg to differ.
james benedict Not really...
For the first time I understand analytics... And it makes a lot of sense... Now I'm pretty sure Melo is never getting that contract
can you please make a video about allen iversons efficiency
Can you do one episode about "Did analytics ruin modern basketball?"
Does true shooting percentage counting metrics differentiate the different types of free-throw attempts:
-Free throws off of made (and 1) or missed (2 or 3 FT) shot attempts
--> 1 attempt not 2
-Free throws off of foul without taking a shot attempt --> 1 attempt not 0
For example, 3:32
Here the player had 18 free throws. However, if you consider that he had 9 scoring attempts on those free throws, then he would have been fouled without attempting a shot all 9 times and during his 5 shot attempts (2 made and 3 missed), he wouldn't have been fouled.
The reasoning behind this is that if he had missed a shot but gotten and made 2 free throws due to being fouled on that shot, then ultimately he should have a 100% true shooting percentage on that shot since his 2pts resulted off of one action (shot attempt) and no rebound was needed to obtain these points.
Instead, by your counting metrics, he would have a 50% true shooting percentage since he would have 2 points / 2 shot attempts (a 2pt FG and a pair of free throws). However, this is inaccurate since these points are the result of one action and therefore his true shooting percentage should be 100% for that shot.
U should do a video on the scoring of Collin sexton a underrated pg who is putting up 22 ppg on crazy efficient scoring shooting 47% and 38%from 3
awesome video! can you do one on PER?
Just makes me think of the video where you mentioned that in 2016, Curry led the league in both volume & efficiency
Awesome thanks!
Would have been nice to use a more modern day example for this like James Harden and Clint Capela.
This is great
Basketball examined showed me that true shooting % is better than eFG%
AI always got flack for his fg% but he was drawing 2-3 defenders with those drives and the cleanup was like an unofficial assist because the offence was based on him penetrating and drawing defenders.
Darryl Davis I disagree his basketball iq was very high. He’s one of the smarter players of his era. Lack of passing was probably just him being stubborn and a few bad shot selections which almost any superstar is guilty of on occasion.
Darryl Davis But look at the guys he would be passing to....... unskilled Dikemebe Mutumbo, Eric snow, George Lynch, etc. Do you want them to take contested two’s while shaq is just sagging in the paint protecting the rim or for iverson to just go 1 on 1.
Darryl Davis That a young mutumbo. He’s way past his prime. There’s this thing called SPACING . When iverson is your teams best 3pt shooter, you have a problem.
Darryl Davis Shaq and Kobe versus iverson and a bunch of role players... You do the math
Darryl Davis ROLE PLAYERS
which is why james harden is one of the most efficient scorers of all time, sitting in the top 15 of career true shooting
Andrew Daniels yes, and Curry is 4th all time.
And Durant is 11...
I try to tell Michael Jordan fans that.
@@MistahUnknown Ive tried before. They whine and complain that TS% and EFG% are fake stats that dont matter
and deandre jordan tyson chandler
Great video but it's missing the effect of USG% when determining offensive quality. Hopefully in another video?
Thank you!!!
Do RPM and RAPM next. They're pretty complex
I felt like I just watched a Khan Academy video but with context I can understand (Sports)
nice video
I find eFG% to be a better predictor of playoff scoring than TS%, especially at the critical moments. I believe it is because the refs don't blow the whistle as often, especially in elimination moments. I think this is the main reason that players who depend on foul calls as a significant portion of their offense (Harden, Paul, Gallinari etc.) seem to regress on the biggest stages. Just a hypothesis.
Message In a Throttle free throw shooting is only bad when you can’t shoot free throws. Jordan and harden are 80% career free throw shooters. True shooting % is flawed though since anyone high volume 3pt shooter who shoots 35% will have a higher true shooting % than a Lebron , Mj or Wade. That’s why Kyle Korver and Jj reddick have a higher true shooting % than Lebron
@@NothingElseMattersJM I'd consider that a feature, not a flaw
Good day, is it possible for u to do a J. Kidd vs Cp3 comparison. I really enjoy these
He's got a breakdown on them both individually on backpicks.com
This actually explains why kobe was shooting around 42 from FG
and you need someone to explain basic things like that??'
@@onlyfacts3178 wym ?
Forgive my ignorance, I'm still learning about advanced basketball metrics. Is there a stat for ball possession time? And possession vs turnovers? Surely a team, even with low percentage shooting, who possess the ball more, pass well, prevent turnovers, exhaust shootclocks, create steals and blocks, free throws, and rebounds well, can perform at a high level even without high gravity superstars or high percentage shooters. Is that correct? This can be the case in hockey, handball, soccer/football, and rugby. Are there examples of such workhorse team play in the NBA that produced championships without high percentage shooting or superstar gravity?
In basketball, both teams get the same number of possessions in a game. It doesnt matter if you score quickly or slowly except in end of game situations
OneEyedKeys There are stats for team ball possession time, however I don’t know if there is one for individual players. Turnovers given possessions could be calculated with turnover rate, which is a percentage of possessions that end in a turnover for a team, typically recorded for 100 possessions. If you want to look at a team that managed to put everything together without a primary high volume superstar, look no further than the 2004 Detroit Pistons, who won the championship. Ironically, both Chauncey and Ben Wallace, who are the subjects of this video, were the two main players on that team. The highest scorer on that team averaged 17ppg. Most of the players were fairly limited offensively, but they’re arguably the best defensive team ever. The other balanced team I can think of is probably the 13-14 Spurs who won the title. Definitely more ball movement than 04 Pistons but not as good defensively (although still pretty much top of the league). Kawhi won FMVP averaging 17ppg. Some pretty interesting teams in league history.
Do this for a kobe vs lebron vs jordan TS% and above/below league average and you will blow up NBA youtube. Can be done however you want aka choose same age, best years, etc.
Sam None of those guys are even in the top 40. True shooting % rewards high volume 3 point shooters and bigs. Slashers or mid range scorers like wade, Lebron, Kobe , Jordan are good in true shooting % but not great
He does it on backpicks.com
do something on the pacers
Do a video of Steph Curry's historic unanimous MVP season and his numbers
cool vid