Both stats measure efficiency, one accounts for free throws and the other doesn't. The fact that you still insist TS% isn't a measure of scoring efficiency is just an indication of how maladjusted you are (although at this point, it's clear you are being deliberately pedantic in wording so that you can back track). Then again, you spend most of your time going on a forum to make fun of a 19 year old, so I shouldn't be surprised.
lol and his explanation was the opposite of what is accurate. TS% is how efficiently you score ALL your points EFG% is how efficiently you shoot from the field
Yes, I believe one can learn something from everyone; but I started learning just hate and ignorance. I will blast people but I let go pretty quickly. I don't post 50 times a day everyday of the week obsessively. I often say, "we will agree that we disagree and I give you the last word." I can't imagine blasting a 19 y/o Mobley if he came into the league struggling as a Rocket. Bigs tend to take longer to develop. I said before the draft I would wholeheartedly support Mobley if the Rockets drafted Mobley.....and I would have. Because I know 19 year olds can be late bloomers. I can speak from experience, I graduated from highschool at 18 and weighed 120 pounds at 5'8" Within two years I sprouted up to 5'11" and 140 pounds. Now I'm about 195 pounds and in my 50's but that's beside the point. I've don't kill Sengun with criticism....just ask those so high on him to ramp down the excitement a tad. Let him ease into it.
The point is I'm not playing your game, you've proven you aren't arguing in good faith.... you're just using rhetorical tricks in an effort to impress stupid people. You can tear any single metric apart because they all have flaws.... but when every single one says something similar, that Jalen Green was one of the worst players in the league getting significant minutes, it's pretty conclusive. Finding examples of players who have improved is one thing, finding examples of players who have improved from being as bad across the board as Jalen Green was to being as good as Jalen Green has been over the past month is another. So use whatever you want, the reality is that Jalen Green went from a guy who made his team take a -20 hit in net rating simply by being on the court to a guy putting up monster numbers as a net positive during the same season..... that's not something that happens often if ever. I know you'll try to say that Green's on off numbers are impacted by others he shared the court with...... but if that was the case, other players would have similar numbers, and they didn't. He was alone as by far the biggest drag to the team when on the court. So I'll save you the time of attempting that false arguement.
Isn't the below the definition of both? TS% = measure scoring effeciency eFG% = measure shooting effeciency Edit: Nvm @jordnnnn posted it before me.
But why is it so many people aren't surprised? Don't you wonder about that? Do you think the Rockets front office is surprised? Did you think they expected him to be great on day one? Do you think his coaches are surprised? Or his teammates? They don't seem to be surprised. Sportswriters who follow the Rockets and watch the games don't seem surprised. I'm not surprised at all. Did I know it would have this year or next? No. I had no idea. But here's the the thing, I figured it was going to happen - that at some point it would fall into place. It wasn't a talent think or intelligence thing for him, it was merely an experience thing. He deserves tremendous credit. He's going to be a big time player. Just eat the crow and be done with it.
No....TS% is how ACCURATELY you shot ALL your shots, eFG% is about how efficiently you score since it takes into consideration that not all shots are worth the same. In fact, I'll expand on this. Lets say we have two players, player A and player B. Both players take 20 shots and both hit 10 of them. Equally accurate shooting. Player A takes 20 2 point shots and hits 10 of them, his TS% is .500 Player B takes 20 3 point shots and hits 10 of them, his TS% is .500 Are both players equally efficient at scoring? Obviously not. Now let's work out their eFG% to see if anything changes. Player A has an eFG% of .500 Player B has an eFG% of .750 How about that, it seems that one metric showed who scored more efficiently and the other just showed how accurately the two players shot.
Undoubtedly the best decision you've made in a really long time, leave the work of spinning false narratives to those who are better at it. steddinotayto is many levels ahead of you when it comes to rhetorically effective fallacious argumentation. Let him handle it.
There are many different reasons why some posters try so hard to dismiss Green. The top 3 IMO (not necessarily in that order): 1. Mobley fans who believe that if Green was bad, Mobley would look better. This is obviously illogical thinking because how good Mobley is has nothing to do with how bad Green is. But I can understand that it gives them an emotional kick. 2. People whose amateur's scouting told them before the draft that Mobley would be the better player, or that Green would be a bust. This group overlap somewhat with the previous group. But while Group 1 love Mobley, this group love themselves and want desperately to be RIGHT. This is by far the most common motivation on the board's debates. I catch myself doing that from time to time. 3. Tilman/FO haters who wants to see yet another failure by the Rockets organization. These posters want to blame everything bad on ownership (and the FO by extension). Sometimes they seem to WANT to see the Rockets being bad just so to validate the hatred of Tilman Fertitta.
I'm sorry your school's education failed you so much, but you can't just make up numbers. Those TS% are just completely wrong. In both of your scenarios, both players took 20 shots, and we will assume 0 free throws. Player A scored 20 points on 20 shots, player B scored 30 points on 20 shots. Player A TS%: TS 50% Player B TS%: TS 75% Would you look at that, same as eFG%. Do you know why? Because there were no free throws. Don't believe me? Input the numbers yourself. I have never seen a poster on this board that is so poorly informed, but speak with such arrogance and confidence.
i think its hilarious u guys talk sh*t about jalen gren. u wouldnt say this sh*t to him at lan, hes jacked. not only that but he wears the freshest clothes, eats at the chillest restaurants and hangs out with the hottest dudes. yall are pathetic lol.
I don’t think anyone is surprised with how he’s playing right now, not even his “haters”. The surprise was how bad he was to start with. Was the organization, sports writers etc surprised? Heck yeah, everyone touted how ready he was due to playing in a pro league already, some said he was the most ready nba rookie in the entire class. He was the second highest in ROY odds before the season started, now he is an afterthought even after the surge. So yes it was a huge surprise to everyone how bad he was, even to the “haters” who were never high on him, we didn’t even expect him to be a playing at a bust level. Are we surprised that he has improved from that level, not at all. But to improve to this degree, is surprising and rare. Yay!
That's entirely fair, my mistake. I cede the point. The tangent is over. That said, I wasn't really bashing TS%, it's a metric I look at just the same as eFG%, but I prefer eFG%. Typically you won't find much difference between the two when it comes to quality though they have different bars for quality. The only reason it came up in this conversation is there was a poster conflating the two. I'd cite, eFG%, they'd respond with TS%. Honestly either shows the point I was making about how bad Jalen Green was playing compared to how good he is playing now. Going from a .504 TS% to a .601 TS% is the same thing as going from a .447 eFG% to a .593 eFG%. They are both ridiculously amazing leaps in scoring efficiency.
And there we have it, you now have decided to change how TS% is calculated all together. The below is how TS% is calculated. Your education has somehow convinced you that the above formula simplifies to PTS/FGA. You could have spent 1 minute learning this instead of 10 minutes typing it out. Edit: I see you have decided to edit out your post displaying your embarrassing maths skills as well instead of leaving it up for others to see. I guess the level of ignorance displayed above was too much even for you, so credit for having a tiny bit of self-awareness.
Yikes, this is a really basic misunderstanding and even you should know better. Googling the definition of TS% is not that hard. At this point I don't know what the argument that you're trying to make is. There were largely two camps at the beginning of the season: 1. People who thought Green was playing horribly but recognized he's a raw, athletic rookie and is likely to improve with time and experience 2. People who thought Green was playing horribly and extrapolated that to mean he was a permanent bust and was very unlikely to be good. You've now invented this third camp to argue against, of people who thought Green was playing well at the beginning of the season. No one actually thought this - it's just a classic goal post moving technique as you've been battered in this argument. At the end of the day, those of us in Camp 1 were more measured in our evaluation and are ultimately being proven right. It's okay to say you missed on this one. Perhaps a lesson in taking a more measured approach in grand declarations. The second argument is about how "rare" this is. I think @steddinotayto has done a great job showing that it's uncommon but not unheard of. This whole metric debate between TS and eFG is irrelevant. TS is obviously the better metric, and both Edwards and Green have improved dramatically there. But even if we buy your bad argument that eFG is better, Edwards still improved by 10% his rookie season, a dramatic improvement! So the conclusion you drew (Edwards improved in TS but not eFG) holds zero weight. Just admit your L, we're all happy Green is playing better, and let's use this thread to talk about his actual play.
Actually, I was correct about the formula, I omitted FTA's since there were none in the example given, however, I made a mistake by inputting the same number of points for both. When I'm wrong, I'm wrong, it happens.
